papers theme 4 development strategies, pathways and synergies

IFSA GLO 2005 Papers Theme 4: Development Strategies, Pathways and Synergies

1

Papers Theme 4

Development Strategies, Pathways and Synergies

Convenor: John Dixon

In: Farming Systems and Poverty: Making a Difference -- Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium of the International Farming Systems Association: A Global Learning Opportunity (31 October – 3 November 2005, Rome, Italy). Editors: John Dixon, Constance Neely, Clive Lightfoot, Marcelino Avila, Doyle Baker, Christine Holding and Christine King , International

Farming Systems Association, Rome, Italy, 2006.

Table of Contents

Highlights of Roundtable Discussions on Papers 4 La liberalización del Comercio Agrícola y sus Consecuencias para la Seguridad Alimentaria y el Objetivo de Reducción de la Pobreza Rural en América Latina y el Caribe (Gordillo de Anda, Gustavo & Jiménez C., Francisco) 16 Harnessing the Power of Partnerships in the Marketplace: Using a Learning Alliance for Agro-enterprise Integration into Agricultural Recovery (Rupert Best, Tom Remington, Shaun Ferris and Mark Lundy) 21 Identifying Strategic Development Pathways for Africn Agriculture (Prem Bindraban, with contributions from Pieter Vereijken, Thomas Price,

John Dixon, Monty Jones, Herman van Keulen and Niek Koning) 31

Aiding Decision Making in Transition to Integrated Farming Systems in Small Watersheds in Northeast Thailand Through a Multi-Agent Systems Model (J.S. Caldwell, Uchada Sukchan, Francois Bousquet, Christophe Le Page,

Kenji Suzuki, Nongluck Suphanchaimat and Somsak Sukchan) 52

Small Livestock for Landless and Small Farmers: Improving Farmers’ Lives through Improved Goat Production Practices in India (Mahesh Chander

and H.P.S.Arya) 60


2

Land Degradation in Ethiopian Highlands: Major Causes, Development Attempts and Future Deliberations (Getinet Desalegn and Tilahun Amede) 64

Scaling Out Strategically: A Methodology for Understanding Patterns and Impacts of the Spontaneous Spread of Technological Innovations (Laura German, Jeremias Mowo, Margaret Kingamkono

and Jennifer Nuñez) 72

Production Potential of Spice Crops under different Farming Situations of Rice based Cropping System over Traditional Cropping System of Chattisgarh State of India (Rajendra Lakpale) 87

Surprising new Partnerships on our Journey towards a Sustainable Rural Area in Noord-Brabant (Rob Maessen and Geert Wilms) 92 Dairy Calves Performance on Dairy Farms around Gaborone Agricultural Region of Botswana (W. Mahabile and H.O. deWaal) 98

Poverty Reduction in Hill Farming Systems Of Nepal through more Equitable Access to Local Resources (A. Maharjan, S. Schulz, N. Rajbhandari, B. Regmi, B. Dhital,

C. Paude and N. Hada) 110 The Use of SWOT Analysis In Participatory Soil Conservation Planning Under Smallholder Farming Systems (M. Manjoro, N. M Alonso, J. M. Fébles) 119

Effective Partnerships for Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Critical Review and a Way Forward (Robert E. Mazur, Dorothy M. Masinde, Lorna Michael Butler) ` 125

Productivity Increase through Crop Diversification in Plantation Crops (M. A. Hamid Miah, M. A. Samad Talukdar , M. A. Ali, R. Ali,

M. A. Quyum and B. Karmakar) 132


3

Productivity Enhancement and Welfare Gains on Smallholdings in South Western Kenya

(Muhammad Lutta, Paul G.A. Omanga and Richard Apamo) 138

Toward Good Agricultural Practices for Rice-Based Farming Systems – Initial Results of the Development and Dissemination of the Rice- Integrated Crop Management Sytems for Food Security, Livelihood Improvement and Environmental Conservation (Nguyen Van Nguu) 145

Risk assessment, market uncertainties and diversification strategies for rubber farmers: comparison between Indonesia and Cambodia using farming systems modeling (E. Penot and L. Feintrenie) 167

Pathways out of Rural Poverty in Marginal Areas: The Role of ‘INRM Technologies’ in a Dry Sub-Region of Syria (Roberto La Rovere, Turkelboom, Francis Aw-Hassan, Aden

Bruggeman) 177

Zero Tillage: Another Revolution in Third World (A.P. Singh and S.K.Choudhary) 188

How Biodiversity Relates to Poverty. Conceptual Framework Design to Support Policy Making (Tonnie Tekelenburg and Jan Joost Kessler) 194 Subsistence and Organisational Strategies of Smallholder Farmers and Rural Workers in the Sub-Andean Drylands of Cuyo (Argentina) (Pablo Tittonell, Lorena Mozas, Natalia Manini, Ileana Paladino,

Federico Vazquez Matías García) 214 Agriculture and Rural Development Project in Cambodia with Scope for Human Security - Nurturing Self-reliant Rural Communities –

(Kunihiro Tokida) 223


4

Highlights of Roundtable Discussions of Papers Introduction Based on the characterization of farming systems and an understanding of their dynamics, differentiated context-specific development pathways will be identified where multi-stakeholder alliances and public-private partnerships (among CSOs, inter-governmental organizations, governments, the private sector and local authorities) are emerging. The challenge is to foster and mainstream these new partnerships with guidelines, regulations and investment practices for managing ecosystems and landscapes from farms to catchments. Such alliances are also required for promoting intensification strategies, environmental services, land care, conservation of the land and biodiversity, livelihoods diversification, conservation agriculture and eco-agriculture. Other emerging issues include urban agriculture and linking mitigation, risk and response for vulnerable systems and populations, including HIV-AIDS. There were seven Roundtables in Theme 4. Roundtable moderators are listed in parentheses. Notes on discussion highlights and recommended follow up actions follow for most of the Roundtables.

• Agropastoral and Dryland Systems (French language; Rym Ben Zid)

• Poverty, Farming Systems and Biodiversity (Tekelenberg and Hellin)

• Conservation Agriculture and Natural Resource Management (Wall and Kienzle)

• The Farming Systems Approach and its Cousins (Neely and Dixon)

• Millennium Development Goals and Farming Systems (Dixon and Bindraban)

• Sustainable Intensification and Integrated farming Systems (Mudhara and Mekuria)

• Development Pathways and Targeting Research and Development Interventions (Adesemi, Woods and la Rovere)

Theme 4 Roundtable (French language): Agro pastoral and dry lands systems Moderator: Rym Bin Zid There were five papers and presentations:

• New organization for local irrigation water management (Morocco),

• Moving crops in greenhouses in the ‘Zibans’ (Algeria),

• Development of dairy goat rearing and goat cheese processing as a generating income activity for women (Morocco),

• Role of the National Development Project for Agricultural Development in regards to recent changes in the farming systems of oasis of Oued Righ (Algeria) and,

• Development of agro-pastoralism in the area of Tioucha (Tunisia).


5

The presentations were quite diverse. Cross-cutting elements identified were:

• As a consequence of government policies and programs, the emergence of new types of labor and input intensive farming systems especially in the ‘Zibans’ and the oasis of Oued Righ (Algeria). Those systems seem to be highly profitable and in these case studies, there was a shift from staple crops farming to market oriented farming,

• the creation of new types of farmer/women organizations: until now very few projects have responded to women needs and water management in irrigated areas was usually controlled by government agencies. These new organizations developed specific activities as dairy goat rearing (cooperative of women in Skoura, southern Morroco). As irrigated farming systems are developing in the ‘ Middle Atlas’ in Morocco and as there is a progressive withdrawal of government agencies from agricultural development, a formal water user association taking into consideration farmers’ needs emerged spontaneously and ,

• the progressive development of technical innovations as a result of adequate policies set up for a long time by government agencies as the adoption and development of Opuntia in Central Tunisia by poor resource farmers to feed up sheep and goats as Central Tunisia is a drought prone area.

Water management as well as resource scarcity was the key issue addressed in that roundtable through different angles: aspects related to production have been mentioned (new farming systems developed) but also aspects related to marketing and community development. Main trends identified during the dicussions were:

• Market oriented farming systems are shaping and developing in place of the staple crops farming systems. Those market oriented systems have got different shapes and scales : systems in areas where top down methods and approaches have been used as in Algeria are quite different from systems developing in areas where participatory methods were adopted as in Skoura in Southern Morrocco or as in Tioucha (Tunisia) where a farmer to farmer learning has occurred to develop apple tree cropping. Simultaneously to that shift, marketing systems are also setting up although with some constraints and,

• combined with this first trend, farmer/women organizations are setting up and in some case, in order to strengthen their activities, are trying to diversify them and to shift, as for example in the association in the ‘Middle atlas’, from a water user association to a community organization in charge of all development activities,

Conclusions and recommendations

• In order not to affect negatively the environment and as semi arid areas are drought prone areas with a high depletion of natural resources, we recommend the adoption of farming systems based on the development and adoption of local innovations and local knowledge as presented in the Tunisian case study (development of a local fodder crop…). Even if those systems are not highly profitable, they at least allow resource poor farmers to make a living and they contribute to protect environment and natural resources,


6

• Policies and programs should take into consideration local dynamics and policies should be regionalized. Every development action should be harnessed to local development elements or dynamics,

• Governments should adopt bottom up approaches and methods in terms of programs and projects design and integrate participatory methods and approaches in their agendas,

• Governments should rethink in a realistic way their role in agricultural development and reshape their intervention in order to strengthen the role of civil society (farmer organizations…).

Theme 4 Roundtable: Poverty, Farming Systems and Biodiversity Moderators: Tonnie Tekelenburg and Jonathan Hellin Introduction The roundtables discussion addressed the issue of how Farming Systems can contribute to attaining the Millennium Development Goals. In this session the focus is on two specific MDG’s 1 and 7, respectively reducing by half hunger and extreme income poverty in relation with environment, especially looking at trade offs between the two. The definition of poverty is captured in the livelihood approach including basic needs. The environmental goal is translated into the goal of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) which says: a significant reduction of the rate of biodiversity. The definition of biodiversity is taken from the CBD into three classes: diversity of ecosystems and agricultural landscapes, diversity of species and genetic diversity of agricultural crops and livestock breeds. Agro-biodiversity is generally understood as the genetic diversity but may also include functional and wild biodiversity in agro-landscapes. The session addressed the impact from poverty reduction strategies on biodiversity as well as the impact on human wellbeing from biodiversity loss. Some general statements can be heard frequently on the relation between poverty and biodiversity, such as a) export oriented growth will alleviate poverty and hunger or b) agricultural intensification is needed to feed people and save biodiversity. This might be true in some cases but not always. The question is to understand why, when and where it happens and when not. The key question posed to participants was: Can Farming Systems contribute to the understanding of the relationship between biodiversity (loss) and poverty (alleviation). Presentations:

• Mohammed Abdul Hamid Miah: Productivity increase through Crop Diversification in Plantation Crops;

• Romina Cavatassi: Developing a methodology for the Analysis of Seed Systems and its impact on Household Welfare and Agricultural diversity;

• Douglas Bardsley: Difference as a Resource for Sustainable Agricultural Development: Responding to the globalization of modern agriculture by supporting local agrobiodiversity;

• Tonnie Tekelenburg: A framework to Support Effective Policy Making on Biodiversity – Poverty relations in Farming Systems in Developing Countries;

• Jonathan Hellin: Poverty, Environmental Goods and Biodiversity in Chiapas, Mexico.


7

Discussion: The following topics were chosen: does agrobiodiversity contribute to wild biodiversity in agricultural landscapes and to poverty reduction? do we find only one unilateral relationship between biodiversity and poverty? what are mechanisms of unsustainable change? are we able to design a (draft) design of a model or conceptual framework that explains the relationship between poverty and biodiversity? what are concrete plans of action for follow up? Does agrobiodiversity contribute to wild biodiversity in agricultural landscapes and to poverty

reduction?

Biodiversity is an umbrella term. Agrobiodiversity is part of biodiversity. Genetic diversity and may increase wild biodiversity by way of adapted management (less intensive agricultural input use). Sorgo showed high genetic diversity (87% land races) compared to wheat (17%). Genetic diversity enhances food security in years of extreme climatic production conditions. It reduces production risks. Wild biodiversity supports productivity bay way of nutrients and soil quality, biological control, water, pollinators and culinary. Do we find only one unilateral relationship between biodiversity and poverty?

The participants found it useful to analyze the relation between family income and biodiversity by way of the environmental Kuznets curve, on which a bifurcation point was added and several pathways were drawn for combinations of enhanced poverty or economic development combined with biodiversity loss or gain. The main question became the intensification of agriculture as a Poverty Reduction Strategy. Intensification was the principal strategy for economic growth in rural areas in developed countries. Should we or can we hold intensification in developing countries. From the Boserup theory of population growth, combined with intensification of production and soil quality improvement can only be explained by crop diversification opportunities and good market perspectives. This specific combination of factors may not be found everywhere. We need a global biodiversity impact assessment in order to understand the effect of intensification. Sachs concluded in the Task Force of the Millennium Project that intensification is needed to irradiate hunger. The group agreed that intensification cannot be seen as a unilateral strategy for all farming systems in the world, but should be promoted where possible in combination with diversification, increased farm size, off farm income and exit from agriculture. Another main topic was the discussion on a possible short cut to sustainable agriculture (with minimal loss of biodiversity and optimal socioeconomic situation of farmers). What are mechanisms of unsustainable change?

Land tenure systems, lack of access to land and resource use rights were mentioned as important drivers of unsustainable change.


8

Are we able to design a (draft) design of a model or conceptual framework that explains the

relationship between poverty and biodiversity?

It was not immediately clear what components are minimally required for the design of a model that explains the relation(s) between poverty and biodiversity. What happens if some important factor does not fit in the model? There is a need to first discuss broader issues before the focus on the presented components. What are concrete plans of action for follow up? Participants could not directly formulate concrete plans of action for linking biodiversity with poverty. It was clear that Farming System presents in principle the platform for linking environmental issues with socioeconomic conditions of people (beta-gamma integration). After the session was agreed between representatives of MNP, The Netherlands and CIAT, Colombia to develop initiatives for modeling watershed assessment, environmental payment schemes as policy option, impact on biodiversity and poverty alleviation.

Theme 4 Roundtable: Conservation Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Moderators: Gavin Wall and Josef Kienzle A group of some 35 participants met to discuss the topic. The round table sought to contribute to knowledge of technologies and approaches that enables farmers and communities to meet their

needs without sacrificing the ability of future generations to meet theirs. It was planned that the discussion that would focus on conservation agriculture and other natural resource management approaches in the context of the resource bases, enterprise patterns, household livelihoods and constraints that constitute individual farming systems. Six short oral presentations began the session. The first paper reported on the challenge of natural resource management in Ethiopia (Getinet Desalegn); the second paper described an innovation network for traditional potato varieties in Venezuela. The two papers emphasised the difficulty of integrating social goals within political and policy constraints and the importance of economic benefits that can accrue to those that rely on natural resources for their livelihoods.The next four papers were an integrated set of presentations on conservation agriculture (CA). The sessions received reports of the Third World Congress on CA that was conducted from 3rd to 7th October 2005 in Nairobi/Kenya (Josef Kienzle and Sally Bunning, FAO), a description of the role of resource conserving technologies in the rice-wheat system of the Indo-Gangetic Plain (Olaf Erenstein, CYMMIT), and a comment (in the form of a reality check) on the practical challenges facing conservation agriculture (Bernard Triomphe, CIRAD). The ensuing discussion highlighted the following key issues (in no particular order):

• Solutions that involve a broad range of issues and which require local learning and adaptation are heavily reliant on local facilitators, who must be available in sufficient numbers to work with individual communities.

• CA requires tools and specially designed equipment such as direct seeders that are still relatively rare and not easy to access (jab planters, animal or tractor drawn planters etc).


9

• Private sector participation in the local adaptation, manufacture, and retail of tools and equipment is critical. The presence of the private sector in India and Pakistan is contributing factor to the successful adoption of the technology. For Africa, the weak status of the private sector and in particular the rural agro-machinery infrastructure has been identified as a constraint.

• Solutions are most often part of a “dynamic innovation system” in which economic viability and a sustained or improved livelihood for all actors is essential.

• Change of the agricultural system towards more resource efficient practices is a long-term process; some of the CA successes have been 15 to 25 years in the making.

• Success is underpinned by institutions as well as enthusiasm. Financial and political support is also necessary. The role of the private sector in it is acknowledged.

• We need to return to farmers’ own perceptions of their situation and problems and make sure that the entry point in trying to assist addresses the immediate problem or need. The identified and proposed solutions and way forward must be fully embedded with farmers’ commitment and ownership.

The moderators tried to distil the findings of the discussion in a manner that captured lessons, actions points and so on. The participants were in accord on the following: Action Points:

• Those engaged in CA need to formulate a set of sensible, practical targets that address what role CA can play, in what farming systems, and where those farming systems exist. There was strong encouragement to move from a simplistic focus on hectares under CA to a more meaningful set of indicators that also addressed the nature of the problem that CA was helping to solve and that acknowledges the circumstances under which small farmers are intended to change to CA and their reasons behind (and without a big impact on the area covered).

• Several participants mentioned the need for using a highly flexible approach, and the need to target/tailor CA to the specific needs and conditions of different groups of farmers (rather than promoting it as blanket recommendation.

• It was also pointed out that there is indeed a need to make use of a real farming system perspective in working with/on CA, rather than using a purely technical/agronomic one.

Lessons:

• To share lessons, it is important to translate experiences in media packages relevant to intended audiences.

• Drawing together various interest groups, for example agriculturalists with environmentalists and with production economists, can help marshal broad support for initiatives to address poverty and food insecurity.

• Progress in any area is not achieved by simply targeting introduction of a technology. Most approaches to complex problems involve change on a number of levels. Farmers’ commitment is essential and the involvement of whole communities is most often necessary.


10

Best Practices:

• Principles have to be applied rather than a pre-packaged solution.

• A clear message is essential.

• Identify the entry point (the immediate problem or threat), then build a strategy/pathway towards the ultimate solution of sustainable agriculture practices in a step-wise manner.

• Champions at all levels are important, from farmers to institutions to policy makers and politicians.

• Many solutions are in fact a systemic innovation system in which local learning and adaptation are crucial. The involvement of the public and private sectors together with farmers and CSOs is important. The Farmer Field School approach in which farmers are learning, experimenting, and sharing was strongly endorsed.

Theme 4 Roundtable: Farming Systems Approaches and Its Cousins Moderators: Constance Neely and John Dixon The key points of papers were presented followed by two rounds of discussions. Particpants identified the following good practices, partnerships and alliances, and open insights. Good Practices

• Kenya – Water saving technique and its socioeconomic benefits. Is it a method? Proliferation. Scaling out.

• Sometimes get different results than expected as scaling analysis

• Has to be contextualized (as example agroforestry)

• Partners and policy support must be nested

• Link tool to the operationality (identify relevant/related policy)

• FFS tool for dissemination

• Longer term v. shorter term – training of trainers for snowballing effect.

• Upscaling with a single effort or tap complexity with a network?

• Participatory Development

• Community based research with active farmer participation

• Education and capacity building

• Agroforestry – limited land what to grow?

• The stakeholders must be present with one another over time

• Modeling – lets farmers link factors and see results

• Understand what farmers are doing – tend to walk/work within our own perspective Partnerships and Alliances (Codes: Strengths – ST; Weaknesses – W; Solutions-SO)

• ST/Develop multi actor partnerships including private sector based on real mutual interest including the long term

• W/There are no equal opportunity benefits for all partners


11

• SO/Consultation of actors – multi-agency as a tool for consensus

• ST/Create a medium for flow of information

• W/ Jealousy and Conflict

• SO/Use clearly defined roles

• ST/ People accept each other and have the same objective

• W/almost impossible to have equality

• SO/leave partners to recognize each others (who they trust) and to go ahead.

• ST/ Idea sharing and opportunities

• W/ Some partners dominate

• SO/Mutual exchange and equality in weaker group – get to know your partners first

• ST/ Fun to share – stimulus – better use of specific knowledge

• W/Responsibility shared – who does what – trust is needed

• SO/ Trust needs to be built, take time to develop

• ST/Opportunity to share knowledge and means – using systems that are already in place

• W/ Inequalities – trade offs

• SO/Minimum level of equality is required (ex. Security)

• ST/ Farmers interact among themselves and researchers among researchers but they do so differently because they have worked with the other

• W/ Time frames and objectives imposed; not all same quality or time prioritized

• SO/ Change the funding agencies paradigm

• ST/ Synergistic effects

• W/ each has their own interest

• SO/ mutual interests and mutual trusts.

• SO/ Not to maximize but to optimize size and emphasis placed on like mindedness Open Insights

• Training of Trainers does not always work…must work in decentralized areas and be there to backstop and support. It is a long process and requires follow up.

• 5-10% are innovators. FFS gets more involved and may be increasing the % of innovators – the method broadens the capacity.

• Quality training

• Service providers trained to be used locally need to be paid. This often creates conflict with the governments.

• Use local policy makers to help with markets

• IAASTD needs help – send a message

• What is the scale?


12

Theme 4 Roundtable: Millennium Development Goals and Farming Systems Moderators: John Dixon and Prem Bindrabani Eight excellent papers were presented covering health, education, environment, reducing project failures, scaling up and development strategies with cases from four regions. Discussion: Discussion begun by reviewing the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs): Goal 1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; Goal 2. Achieve universal primary education; Goal 3. Promote gender equality and empower women; Goal 4. Reduce child mortality; Goal 5. Improve maternal health; Goal 6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; Goal 7. Ensure environmental sustainability; Goal 8. Develop a global partnership for developmentThese eight MDGs have 18 quantitative targets and 48 indicators for montoring progress towards the achievement of the goals. The FAO-World Bank Farming Systems and Poverty characterised and mapped farming systems across developing countries, and estimated the relative importance of five key development pathways to the achievement of MDG 1 (halving of poverty) in each of the farming systems. Participants identified the following categories of farming systems contributions to the MDGs:

• New knowledge

• Poverty Reduction Strategy

• Employment

• FS contextual

• Large scale replication (regional platforms high transaction costs)

• Raise awareness Recommendations for action:

• Concept underutilized in policies (PRSP)

• FS based case studies on biodiversity

• SARD – scale up and share good practices

• FS- diversity

• Conceptualization of FS (incl drivers)

• IFSA database

• Map progress, impact & learning

• Hot Spot projects

• Raise political awareness

• In marketing system – internalize externalities


13

Theme 4 Roundtable: Sustainable Intensification and Integrated Farming Systems Moderators: Maxwell Mudhara and Mulugetta Mekuria After the presentation of papers, participants identified the lessons, failures, best practices and implications for scaling up and one central recommendation. Lessons/failures:

• Opportunity exists to increase productivity from manipulating agronomic interventions without increasing the level of input use. The existing body of knowledge needs tapping into innovations.

• Require targeted innovations to vulnerable groups.

• Technology development process should always remain focused on the intended end use, i.e., the characteristics of the target farmers.

• Use simple practical technologies

• Mother-baby type trials facilitate farmers’ participation.

• Increased communication at all levels Best practices:

• Improve on the technologies that farmers are already using.

• Farmers Life School approach. Go beyond agricultural technologies. Implications for Scaling up:

• Farmers need to develop practical technologies.

• Build farmers ability to intervene and innovate, i.e., empowerment. Make resources available to enable that process possible.

• Identify partners at local, national and international levels

• Donors should also think about how the process, rather that giving unrealistic timeframes.

• Consider the implication of the technologies, e.g.. labour and other resources at farm-level

• Increase the number of practitioners

Several aspects should be scaled up:

• Technology

• Ability to innovate (neglected)

• Policy and institutional strengthening. Encourage policy makers to develop interventions that facilitate partnership.

• Technology development process Need to think about monitoring and evaluation so that the practitioners remain accountable.

Recommendation:

• Continue to involve stakeholders, i.e., at local level

• Facilitate farmers-to-farmers extension.


14

• Identify ways of strengthening regional and country chapters. Theme 4 Roundtable: Development pathways and targeting research and development interventions Moderators: Ade Freeman, John Dixon and Roberto la Rovere Introduction One paper was presented on analyses of ex-post and ex-ante impact assessment and five papers on analytical approaches for targeting research and development interventions. The targeting papers presented insights from regional, national, meso- or community level scales. Key lessons:

• The analytical approaches presented were useful in targeting research and development interventions but they need to move beyond conceptual frameworks to more fully exploit the complementarities and synergies between research and development interventions.

• The information and knowledge generated needs to be in the public domain to enhance their use for decision making

• There is need to test whether these analytical approaches are working by linking them to M&E systems, including assessment of whether the development partners are using them in their policy documents, strategies, and investment priorities

Best practices

• Develop early engagement and dialogue with users of this information – governments; development agencies (lending and non-lending institutions); NGOs, private sector etc. - who need it for decision making.

• Think cross-sectoral i.e. beyond agriculture, as solutions may lie outside the farm

• Make the information more understandable so that it help people at all levels – from international agencies to CBOs – understand why cross-sectoral, systems research is useful and be explicit about the questions it can answer

• Think not just about what partners but how to work with partners. Identify champions who can help foster partnerships & linkages

• Have a communication strategy. Involve others (communication experts) – not necessarily researchers – who can help communicate with a broader audience.

• Integrate targeting approaches with bottom up approaches to ensure that strategies and priority interventions respond to the real needs of farmers and other target groups. In some contexts, these needs may extend beyond the farm level to include advisory services on marketing; meeting grades and standards and other market requirements.

Implications for scaling up

• The analytical approaches provide a useful conceptual approach for thinking about scaling up. This needs to be complemented with early dialogue with key stakeholders to ensure that they lead to development investments that can be scaled up


15

• Research involvement in program implementation and M&E systems to learn lessons that can be useful for scaling up.

Action points to follow up/Next steps

• Organize (use) regional consortia among research and development partners to continue dialogue on integrating macro and meso analysis and implementing activities in regional programs.

• In Africa, strengthen linkages with the Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support Systems (SAKSS), NEPAD’s CAADP, and the CGIAR’s sub-Saharan Africa Challenge Program.

• Identify national champions and strengthen dialogue in contexts of PRSPs and other national strategy and investment framework

• Undertake complementary analytical work to identify (and refine) robust proxies for stratification in parallel with the application of the framework for investment targeting.


16

La liberalización del comercio agrícola y sus consecuencias para la seguridad alimentaria y el objetivo de reducción de la pobreza rural en América Latina

y el Caribe1

Gordillo de Anda, Gustavo & Jiménez C., Francisco

Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, Regional Office for Latin America and the Carribean

El Comercio en Nuestra Región La agricultura sigue constituyendo una actividad económica vital a fin de dar a las personas la posibilidad de alimentarse a sí mismas, produciendo sus propios alimentos, o de ofrecer una fuente de empleo e ingresos para acceder al suministro alimentario. Así mismo, una parte fundamental de la actividad comercial de los países en desarrollo, especialmente de aquellos catalogados como inseguros en aspectos alimentarios. América Latina y el Caribe es la más orientada al comercio agrícola de todas las regiones de países en desarrollo, tendencia que es particularmente marcada desde mediados de los años noventa, período de liberalización del comercio y revitalización de los acuerdos comerciales internacionales. Si bien la región es exportadora neta de productos agrícolas, su situación no es homogénea en ese sentido: mientras que algunos países son grandes exportadores otro son importadores especialmente de alimentos Un gran porcentaje de los países latinoamericanos dependen de las exportaciones de un pequeño número de productos básicos agrícolas para una gran parte de sus ingresos de exportación. La enorme dependencia de uno o algunos productos básicos, comercializados generalmente como materias primas, vuelve a estos países extremadamente vulnerables a las cambiantes condiciones del mercado. La apertura de mercados para productos agrícolas de alto valor agregado y requerimiento de mano de obra en los países desarrollados mantiene una importante significación en el aumento de volumen y valor de las exportaciones de muchos países de América Latina y el Caribe y por consiguiente, en el crecimiento económico de estos. Sin embargo, este impulso pareciera estar bloqueado por los altos niveles arancelarios que mantienen muchos países desarrollados sobre productos agrícolas mas elaborados, lo cual dificulta el tránsito desde la simple exportación de commodities a la exportación de productos con mayor valor agregado. Las crestas arancelarias y el escalonamiento arancelario son las dos principales razones de la limitada participación de los países en desarrollo en la exportación de productos elaborados.

1 Las informaciones y puntos de vista que contiene este artículo son de exclusiva responsabilidad de sus autores y no

coinciden necesariamente con los de la FAO.


17

Por otro lado, aunque se ha avanzado en la reducción de la protección y en una mayor orientación hacia el funcionamiento eficiente de los mercados internacionales, los avances en general han sido insuficientes. Responsabilidades e Incertidumbres Los aranceles, las subvenciones y otras políticas de los países desarrollados que distorsionan el comercio han erosionado en gran medida la cuota de mercado y los ingresos de exportación de la mayoría de los países de la región. Pero las políticas, prioridades y condiciones dentro de estos países han contribuido también a su pérdida de competitividad y a su incapacidad de diversificarse abriéndose camino a sectores más rentables y menos inestables. La falta de acceso a servicios de crédito y de extensión y a una información valida sobre el mercado representa una amenaza para la capacidad de la pequeña agricultura de acabar con su dependencia de los productos primarios tradicionales y de diversificarse mediante la comercialización de productos agrícolas de mayor valor. Las políticas proteccionistas de los países desarrollados generarían una falta de interés por desarrollar infraestructura rural en los países más pobres, pero por otra parte los propios sesgos anti-rurales de las elites políticas limitan la existencia de políticas públicas favorables que fortalezcan la capacidad competitiva de la agricultura familiar. A lo anterior se suma una debilidad institucionalidad para el desarrollo rural y la competitividad de las actividades agrícola. Los nuevos problemas relacionados con la contracción del gasto publico en la agricultura y la disminución de la asistencia oficial y prestamos para el desarrollo, ha hecho cada vez mas difícil el escenario para los países vulnerables, que ven al comercio agrícola como el instrumento mas próximo para lograr la seguridad alimentaria. América Latina es una región considerada no prioritaria para la asistencia oficial, por tanto el financiamiento para erradicar la pobreza rural y la desigualdad social solo puede provenir del comercio internacional y de la inversión privada nacional y extranjera en la región, tomando como limite la propia situación fiscal. Existe la idea de que lograr reducir las trabas al comercio de gran parte de los productos básicos agrícolas no traería esos beneficios tan largamente difundidos para la pequeña agricultura de los países en desarrollo, sino mas bien la ventaja recaería en un reducido número de empresas transnacionales y compañías de distribución que han conseguido un control cada vez mayor sobre el comercio agrícola y en particular sobre el comercio de cultivos de alto valor y productos elaborados. Sumado a que América Latina y el Caribe es la región mas desigual del mundo y los beneficios se reparten muy desigualmente, se podría estar encubriendo una medida de carácter proteccionista, que no debiera debilitar los esfuerzos por lograr una mayor equidad en los mercados internacionales y una mejor inserción de la pequeña agricultura en los mercados de productos agrícolas mas elaborados.


18

¿Quiénes son los que realmente se están beneficiando del mejor acceso a los mercados? ¿Son realmente la mayoría de la población, los agricultores pobres, la agricultura familiar, o tan solo los grandes consorcios que concentran un porcentaje muy amplio de la producción agrícola? La pregunta es válida, pero las respuestas pueden ser de muy diversas maneras. Es determinante centrar los argumentos en contra de la desigualdad y no en contra de la apertura de mercados. Bajo el Marco actual de Negociaciones Actualmente, es prioritario esclarecer la coyuntura social, política y económica a partir de la cual se desarrollan las actuales negociaciones comerciales para América Latina y el Caribe, para evitar seguir agotando esfuerzos en la búsqueda de nuevas formulas mágicas. La permanente búsqueda de alguna piedra filosofal que ayude a resolver los problemas característicos de la Región, responde a una reacción característica de no querer afrontar los específicos, concretos y persistentes problemas de América Latina y el Caribe, que deben ser asumidos en el diseño de políticas publicas. Muchas de las negociaciones comerciales de la última década fueron realizadas bajo el supuesto de que existe un problema sistemático y evidente que se traduce en la falta de certidumbre en las políticas públicas latinoamericanas. Esta falta de continuidad no se observa tan solo en el cambio de un gobierno, sino a veces dentro de un mismo régimen. La falta de certidumbres y los cambios de timón bruscos en las políticas públicas llevan a concebir acuerdos como los tratados de libre comercio, que obligan a un país, como sector publico, como alianza política y social, a mantener un determinado rumbo consistente a lo largo de un horizonte de 15 a 20 años, que es indispensable para que cualquier política publica pueda tener efecto, madurar y ser socialmente incorporada dentro de la estructura de incentivos e institucional. Tres temas son importantes de considerar bajo este nuevo marco de negociaciones: El primero de ellos es el tema de las coaliciones. ¿Cuáles son las coaliciones políticas que permiten llevar adelante una determinada reforma, planteamiento o negociación -que incluye a ganadores y perdedores- que puedan ser creíbles, aceptables y sostenibles a lo largo del tiempo? Si se ve desde el ámbito agrícola, más problemas aún se encontrarán respecto a la construcción de coaliciones, al observar el carácter heterogéneo del campo latinoamericano y la pronunciada desigualdad de ingresos, de acceso a bienes públicos y a decisiones políticas en la región. Los tratados de libre comercio son el mecanismo a garantizar el rumbo consistente, pero la presencia de ganadores y perdedores y como resolver esto en el marco de la construcción de


19

consensos básicos no parecen ser un tema resuelto. No se ve claro como los ganadores pueden compartir sus ganancias con el resto de la sociedad y como los perdedores pueden ser compensados hasta en tanto estén en condiciones de aprovechar las potenciales oportunidades. Los nuevos acuerdos para América Latina y el Caribe, deben ser vistos como herramientas para el desarrollo, en especial para el sector agrícola, más que como objetivos medidos solamente en términos de inversión extranjera y flujos de comercio. El segundo tema es el problema de las instituciones. Se ha desarrollado una amplísima vertiente de neoinstitucionalismo y de los impactos que pueden tener las reglas del juego en las negociaciones comerciales y el comercio agrícola internacional. Es importante introducir en el debate las reglas que puedan conectar el avance en materias de negociaciones comerciales con el avance al interior de los países en temas de desarrollo y equidad. No tan solo tiene que existir una conexión discursiva o programática, sino particularmente de reglas e instituciones y evidentemente de resultados tangibles para toda la ciudadanía. ¿Cuál es el papel de las instituciones en el crecimiento sustentable y con equidad para los países de América Latina y el Caribe? El tercer tema hace relación con los vínculos y las articulaciones, que son fundamentales para avanzar de una manera articulada en el ámbito productivo, ya sea en lo agrícola y en lo no agrícola de la región. Lo rural va más allá de la agricultura y las actividades económicas en el medio rural comprenden más que las actividades agrícolas. Esta vinculación es decisiva para que la agricultura y los habitantes del medio rural, particularmente aquellos en condiciones de pobreza e indigencia, puedan desempeñar un papel más importante e influyente. Los nuevos acuerdos deben ser reformulados como elementos claves para una mejor inserción en los circuitos internacionales y para fortalecer vínculos en actividades, productos y actores a lo largo de las cadenas productivas que aseguren una más plena incorporación al circuito de la innovación, investigación y desarrollo. La Persistente Desigualdad América Latina y el Caribe se alza como la región con los niveles de desigualdad más grandes en el mundo. Todos los países de la región son más desiguales que el promedio mundial. En 17 de estos países un 25% de la población vive por debajo de la línea de la pobreza y en tres de ellos la proporción de pobres supera el 50%. También encabeza la mayor desigualdad en el acceso a activos como la tierra o el empleo. Siete de cada diez empleos creados en la región desde 1990 corresponden al sector informal. Algunos analistas estiman que la pobreza en América Latina que afecta a más de 200 millones de personas se habría eliminado si la región tuviera la misma distribución de ingreso que tiene algunos países de Europa del Este o de Asia.


20

Considerados altamente injustos por la mayoría de la población, los altos niveles de desigualdad mantienen en un rezago evidente a muchos países de la región al: disminuir el crecimiento económico y el desarrollo; disminuir el ritmo de reducción de la pobreza al reducir el crecimiento; reducir la capacidad de la región para manejar la volatilidad económica; limitar la calidad en las respuestas macroeconómicas a los shock; y propiciar un contexto que favorece espirales de violencia y crimen. Esta aguda desigualdad afecta todos los aspectos de la vida social y política. El problema se manifiesta de muchas formas, ya sea a través del poder político, el acceso al capital humano y, particularmente, el acceso a la educación o el disfrute de bienes culturales. La inequidad acrecienta la disparidad social y productiva de la sociedad, dificulta la construcción de consensos duraderos y alimenta una visión política cortoplacista y depredadora. La desconfianza mina la ciudadanía y la competencia económica, porque la exclusión es el enemigo principal del desarrollo. Por ello, los avances en materia de pobreza y desnutrición no han sido de manera pareja ni adecuada. Las políticas de seguridad alimentaria tienen que responder a una visión integral, que reconozca que: � La desnutrición infantil constituye uno de los mecanismos principales de la transmisión

intergeneracional de la pobreza y la desigualdad; � El sector rural concentra el más alto porcentaje de pobreza y hambre en la región; � Existe la necesidad de aumentar la productividad agrícola, para mejorar el nivel de ingresos

de los agricultores; � Hay que enfatizar la centralidad de la variable genero, porque las mujeres son el segmento

poblacional más afectado, ya sea en zonas rurales o urbanas; La vía que pondera a todos por igual es el fortalecimiento de una democracia de calidad cuyo deliberado propósito sea erradicar la exclusión, donde se tengan por un lado reales alternativas para elegir y, por otro, chequeos y balances que le den al sistema confiabilidad. Una democracia que sustente un Estado responsable y con respuestas para todos los ciudadanos. .


21

Harnessing the Power of Partnerships in the Marketplace: Using a Learning Alliance for Agro-enterprise Integration into Agricultural Recovery

Rupert Best, Tom Remington, Shaun Ferris and Mark Lundy

Global Forum on Agricultural Research, Catholic Relief Service, Kenya, International Center for Tropical Agriculture, Uganda and Colombia

Abstract CIAT and CRS have developed a long term Learning Alliance, based on the concepts of market engagement to meet the needs of rural households living in extreme poverty that is transforming how both institutions work. Through this process CRS has shifted from a supply side approach to disaster recovery, with an emphasis on food security based sustainable production, to the application of a market orientation. This new approach is being applied at the outset of recovery interventions; leading to better profiling of rural households and the identification of appropriate market opportunities and focused agro-enterprise support. Disaster affected producers are linked to markets, in a process that strengthens their agro-enterprise capacity, increases smallholder income and resilience to future shocks. The result has been an evolutionary process of co-innovation and mutual learning between CIAT and CRS, which connects research with development and provides a bridge between disaster recovery and development.

Introduction Smallholder farm families in developing countries are faced with the ever-increasing imperative to incorporate themselves into the market economy in order to generate cash income that will allow them to meet their basic needs, and through savings and asset building to incrementally improve their livelihoods. Typically these farm families have been accustomed to producing basic food staples for their own subsistence with small surpluses for sales in the marketplace. Unfortunately, these commodities are of low value and over the past three to four decades, the major food products have experienced a steady decline in their real price as a result of improved production technology, declining terms of trade and over supply in the global marketplace. As such, smallholder families are currently stuck on what economists refer to as “Cochrane’s treadmill” whereby many farmers all produce the same undifferentiated commodities and thus are price takers in the market (Berdegue, 2001). Among the options that smallholders have for confronting this situation are:

• Improving the competitiveness of production and strengthening their organizational structures to achieve economies of scale for production, marketing and access to services

• Adding value to the products that they currently grow by adopting methods that enhance product quality and the incorporation of post-harvest handling and processing activities that


22

meet the needs of clients or consumers

• Diversification, by incorporating into their production system higher value crops or livestock that have an identified market demand

• Entering new types of contractual agreements that help to build long term relations with buyers and through systems such as “appellation” to sell produce at advantageous prices.

Clearly, for farming communities suffering from acute / chronic stress or in situations of disaster, taking advantage of these options is a major challenge that can only be realistically achieved when farmers are facilitated by service providers who can integrate processes of recovery and marketing. For this to be effective new activities must be competitive sustainable and equitable in the distribution of benefits and take on board the basic business principles of: 1. A market orientation which produces the right product for the right buyer at the right time

and price;

2. The establishment of production systems that makes efficient use of existing financial, human, social, physical and natural resources;

3. The incorporation of necessary post-harvest handling and processing techniques to achieve volume sales and a quality product;

4. Appropriate business and marketing skills and organizational schemes which lead to economies of scale, and

5. Improved links among market chain actors and flows of both market based information and new production technologies.

Encouraged by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Catholic Relief Services (CRS) has recognized the need for incorporating a market orientation in their development support for farming communities and is adopting with their partners a market chain approach to the development of prioritized crops or products.

Within the research realm, the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), through its Rural Agro-enterprise Development Project (RAeD), and Foodnet2 have been

generating methods and tools aimed at responding to the entrepreneurial development needs of institutions that support rural communities. These methods and tools, which have been developed and validated with R&D partners, can be used for capturing and systematizing market information and developing new agro-enterprises. Together, they make up the component parts of what is termed ‘territorial based approach to agro-enterprise development’ (Lundy et al., 2005).

2 FOODNET is an ASARECA Regional Research Network for Marketing and Agro-processing in Eastern and

Southern Africa. ASARECA – Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Southern Africa


23

Given the comparative strengths of both institutions and the urgent need to find new ways of addressing the severe challenges faced by smallholder farming communities in their recovery from disaster, CRS and CIAT decided to embark on a joint approach to market-led development through a process entitled a “learning alliance”. What is a Learning Alliance? A learning alliance is a model of mutual, participatory learning between research institutions, development organizations and rural communities. The alliance aims to accelerate institutional change, initiate processes of co-innovation and deepen the level of impact with rural communities. The process (Figure 1) involves series of “learning spaces” and comprises a) the identification of a common are area of interest or theme and the definition of a learning agenda based on the demand of participants, b) guided learning based on participants own experience and best practice, c) putting into practice what has been learnt, reflection and feedback on what has worked and what has not worked, d) further cycles of learning, practice, reflection and feedback and e) systematization and documentation of what has been learned.

Figure 1. Agro-enterprise Learning Alliance process where L denotes learning process based on

project site activities implemented since last workshop

This incremental and flexible approach differs substantially from the common practice of attempting to ‘train’ development practitioners in new methods and tools in one-off workshops of short duration (Lundy, 2004). A typical agro-enterprise Learning Alliance process lasts


24

between 20 to 30 months with workshops and field visits spaced at six to eight month intervals. The results from the field applications are documented and analyzed to improve existing approaches, methods and tools. They can also be used to formulate new research proposals targeted towards specific issues identified jointly by research and development organizations, and; promote processes of reflection regarding the effectiveness of the existing development paradigm and possible needs for change. Information is shared with colleagues from other countries through electronic media such as Bellanet Discussion groups. CRS-CIAT Experience Using the Learning Alliance Concept The Alliance initiated in East Africa in 2002 with a partnership between CRS-East African Regional Office (CRS-EARO) and CIAT-Foodnet was closely followed by a CRS-CIAT partnership in Central America. The agro-enterprise Learning Alliance between CRS and CIAT has subsequently evolved into a global relationship with activities underway in 343 countries across five regions: East and West Africa, Southeast Asia, South Asia and Latin America. These experiences have proved to be highly successful in terms of introducing and implementing new skills, but also in providing CRS and CIAT management, staff, and scientists with new insights into how they can best manage the process of learning and applying new strategies into their working environment. Some of the most important experiences and lessons learned are detailed below.

The shift from a relief/production approach to a market/enterprise orientation

Most participants have expressed the view that the shift from a production to a marketing approach to agriculture is a far more fundamental change than they had first anticipated. Field staff can articulate this new approach with their traditional partners - the farmers - but they also have to include a new client base, which involves the many other actors in the marketing chain, i.e. traders, processors, retailers, other specialist private sector groups and providers of business development services. To take on this new challenge, many countries in E. Africa, for example, have hired specialist marketing staff prior or during the Learning Alliance process, as they felt the need to incorporate additional competencies to take on the new activities. The agro-enterprise approach also requires that field staff are equipped with adequate levels of participatory, communication and facilitation skills. These skills, which are not similar across all participants, are key in working with farmers to explore their marketing options and improve their enterprise abilities.

3 Latin America: Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Haiti Eastern Africa: Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania, Madagascar Western Africa: Gambia, Niger, Ghana, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Mali, Benin, Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of Congo South East Asia: Vietnam, Philippines, Cambodia, East Timor, Aceh South Asia: India, Afghanistan


25

Sensitization of sponsors

It is important to involve sponsors (country level senior managers and, where appropriate, donors) in the establishment of the Learning Alliance to ensure buy in and a full appreciation and understanding of the process, and to agree upon goals, time frames and outputs. The managers are not required to attend each of the workshops, as they will not apply the knowledge directly. However, it is vital that they understand the concepts in order for them to facilitate and support the process in their domains. The fact that senior management within Country Programs often did not understand the Agro-enterprise Learning Alliance process conceivably threatened continuing support and institutionalization of the change and learning.

Selection and continuity of participants

Not all persons are suited nor may wish to participate in a Learning Alliance process. The first step in embarking on a learning alliance is to ensure that Country Program managers understand and support the process and are fully engaged in the selection of their staff. Participants need to exhibit an entrepreneurial ‘aptitude and attitude’ and fully understand how to use the particular tools in a systematic process. Care in selecting appropriate people with sufficient interest and time to participate is key, as is assuring sufficient organizational space to adapt and learn new tools and approaches. In East Africa, those countries that maintained staff throughout the workshops made best progress. In situations where women play a predominant role in agriculture, women participants in the Learning Alliance are highly desirable. To date, participants in the workshops in all regions have been predominantly male. Consideration needs to be given to including microfinance staff – more of whom are women with better entrepreneurial skills.

Timeframe

A desire to cover various complex topics effectively in a short amount of time has led at times to a less than optimal learning process. In all components of the Learning Alliances additional time – one or two months – has had to be added to allow countries to advance sufficiently to move on to the next stage. For example, the second workshop in West Africa has been postponed for three months due to the diversion of staff attention to the food crisis in the Sahelian countries.

Appropriate materials

Access to draft or completed training manuals from the outset of the Learning Alliance, has given greater confidence to the participants. However, CIAT, as a research center that values research and theory, produces training materials that in some circumstances are considered too complex for use at the community or even extension level. The adaptation, and in many instances translation, of the materials is needed for them to be of use in different socio-economic and cultural settings. To address this problem, joint redesigning of the training materials between CIAT and development partners is a good way to improve the documentation and build ownership of the content.


26

Monitoring and evaluation and process documentation

Monitoring and evaluation needs to be embedded into the process. Participants have appreciated the importance of and are seeking improved communication and exchange of experiences, with more frequent backstopping and monitoring visits. Regrettably, there is little motivation for countries to document their experiences and regional facilitators have to take up the task. The failure to carry out analysis and documentation of participatory processes limits organizational learning by both partners. Simpler procedures for process monitoring are required so as to make it easier to share experiences among countries and across regions, and roles and responsibilities need to be made explicit from the outset.

Institutional learning and change

Ownership by the CRS country participants and their partners has increased as the process has progressed and tangible results are being observed. In some countries, CRS is now recognized as having a capability in market and agro-enterprise development and other government and non-government organizations are seeking their support and collaboration. This has resulted in the inclusion of the CIAT agro-enterprise approach in new proposals in several countries. From the participants’ perspective, the longer-term approach to training provides a very useful insight into how CRS as an institution takes on-board new ideas. From the facilitators’ perspective, the Learning Alliance has helped understand how the process of learning fits within the culture of CRS and also how the process of information exchange and strategic decision-making works between management and field staff.

Trust, collaboration and organizational relationships

Increasing trust between development partners, CIAT and Foodnet has served not only to implement a Learning Alliance but also to initiate new proposals. Beyond the extension of the agro-enterprise activities across the globe, the two institutions have more recently embarked on a joint reconnaissance and learning experience on the subjects of farmer organization and savings schemes for investment, and farmer experimentation, three crucial aspects related to successful agro-enterprise development itself and local innovation processes that build the capacity of the rural population to generate and access new knowledge and technology. A Learning Alliance also therefore helps to open further channels of communication for mutual benefit.

Impact The learning alliance process is not an academic exercise, and in addition to the learning experience, the agro-enterprise approach aims to provide tangible social and economic change for beneficiaries within the timeframe of implementation. In Eastern Africa there have already been some highly successful interventions. Examples are taken from Madagascar and Kenya.

In Madagascar a pilot project was used to train 4 new staff members. These staff worked with 130 farmers in approximately 6-8 groups over a 4-month, off-season, period. Based on market demand studies, farmers selected 7 products including: broiler chickens, peas, irrigated green beans, Foie Gras, cucumber, cabbages and wheat. Workshops were held between market chain


27

actors and farmer groups to establish informal sales arrangements. Although only a pilot project, there is practical evidence that new skills have been learnt in terms of market evaluation.

Farmers and their association are taking records on gross margins to analyze the profitability of crop options and diversification had occurred into planting crops off-season crops to increase annual incomes.

At the institutional level, the CRS program, hired new staff with marketing skills. The CIAT training materials were translated into Malagasy and a farmer curriculum was developed to support marketing. The CRS team has incorporated the agro-enterprise approach in their latest project, which is working in four provinces, with a value of US$ 2 million over the next 3 years. At the policy level, advocacy by the CRS team has led to the Ministry of Agriculture taking a marketing approach in their new strategic plan.

In Kenya, the agro-enterprise approach has been applied in four project sites. The process has involved 49 farmer groups who have invested in a range of market options (Table 1). The process is proving to be beneficial both in terms of income generated by both men and women farmers.

Table 1. Indicators in Kenya’s Agro-enterprise projects

Territory Target

population, (households)

Products PMG

(number) Members (number)

Volume sold (mt)

Value in (US$)

Mbeere 5,000

Greengrams, blackgrams cowpeas, chickpea and coriander

9 447 32 13,103

Homabay 5,000

Groundnuts, sweet potato, cassava, sunflower / oil, fish and horticulture

27

3,014 (male-1,532

female- 1,482

145 800 ltrs

78,175

Kitui 4,000

Greengrams and cotton (not sold yet) 8

381 (male- 99

female-282) 161 46,153

Tana River 4,125

Greengrams, cowpeas, groundnuts, kales, and tomatoes

5 4,000 3.5 3,222

Totals 18,125 49 7842 140,653

PMG: producer marketing group


28

Conclusions

The CIAT-CRS agro-enterprise Learning Alliance has had an impact on both CIAT and CRS. With learning at the heart of the alliance, it is expected that – in addition to the internal learning of the alliance – there would be external learning about the process.

What have been the outcomes for CRS?

From CRS’s standpoint, the CIAT-CRS Learning Alliance has had four significant outcomes – Approach, Integration, Process and Partnership.

• Firstly, the participatory approach to agro-enterprise that addresses the challenge of changing both knowledge and attitudes in order to change practice has resonated at CRS. The agro-enterprise approach has proved to be fully compatible with CRS values - that include assisting rural families and communities living in extreme poverty, supporting the role of women in agriculture and protecting the natural resource base that sustains rural communities. Agro-enterprise has entered the CRS lexicon and the shift from an emphasis on production to markets is occurring across participating countries.

• Secondly, agro-enterprise has forced CRS to confront persistent challenges and embrace integration. Most notably has been the need to support communities in playing an effective role in agro-enterprise. Rather than providing beneficiaries with services and inputs, the agro-enterprise approach has brought to the forefront the need to work with partners in the local community to provide services and empower people with skills rather than provide them with quick but unsustainable solutions. Concurrent with the recognition of the need to support community groups has come the need to recognize the opportunity of integrating agro-enterprise and microfinance, with a focus on internal informal group savings and lending.

• Thirdly, CRS has embraced the learning alliance concept – across a wide range of sectors and partnerships, recognizing the need to work closely with research and technical partners in addition to our national implementing partners and to move from a series of one off contractual, project-based agreements to a strategic and sustained commitment to co-learning and participation in innovation processes.

• And lastly, the agro-enterprise learning alliance has increased CRS appreciation of and comfort with research partnerships. If in the past, suggestions to collaborate with research were met with suspicion and skepticism, CRS Country Programs are now actively engaging a range of international and national research partners in agro-enterprise related activities. CRS understands that research-development partnerships result in stronger proposals and more effective implementation and that support for research must be built into the budget to sustain the learning alliance.


29

What has CIAT learned from the process?

• Firstly, and possibly most importantly, has been the ‘ground-truthing’ of the agro-enterprise approach to under a wide range of socio-economic conditions across many countries. Participants have found that the principles of the agro-enterprise approach are relevant and workable in each of their situations. The methods and tools that we provide, however, are only a starting point and the ability to interpret these and adapt them to local circumstances is critical for success. The reflection is: are complete field guides an effective tool or should stripped-down ‘principal-based approach’ with significant local development and ownership of resulting tools be prioritized?

• CIAT has also learned that our approach, however sound it may be, and logical in its sequencing, can be onerous in terms of time and commitment of development personnel who are on the ground, and who often have to face situations that need immediate solutions. This raises the idea of the dual or twin track approach to agro-enterprise development that recognizes that it is necessary to ‘jump’ some of the steps and gain confidence with rural communities with concrete actions to ‘grow’ enterprises and achieve short term results.

• The surge in interest in the agro-enterprise Learning Alliance caught CIAT (and CRS) by surprise. ‘Going global’ – from the original one region and eight Country Programs to five regions and 34 programs and then a second process of nationalizing the learning alliances has resulted in an considerable jump in demand for training and facilitation support. This demand was met primarily by consultants – former CIAT and CRS staff grounded in the area-based approach. However, strategically, CIAT needs to meet this demand and in so doing, be remunerated in order to ensure long term financial sustainability.

• Lastly, the experience of closely identifying with a major development partner and working together to achieve a significant change in how ‘business’ within organizations is done has been an immensely challenging and satisfying as participants manifest the appropriateness and usefulness of what they have learnt in dealing with their development challenges. It is a job as yet unfinished, but the excitement is there to consolidate the relationship and make it into a showcase of mutual institutional learning and change.

Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the participation of their colleagues in Africa, Latin America and Asia in building and putting into practice the Learning Alliance approach applied to agro-enterprise development.

References Berdegue, J. 2001. Learning to beat Cochrane’s treadmill: Public policy, markets and social

learning in Chile’s small-scale agriculture. In: Leeuwis and Pyburn (eds.). Wheelbarrows full of frogs: Social learning in rural resource management. International Research and Reflection, University of Wagenigen, Holland.

Lundy, M. 2004. Learning alliances with development partners: A framework for out scaling research results. In: Pachico, D. (ed.). Scaling up and out: Achieving widespread impact


30

through agricultural research. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), Cali, Colombia.

Lundy, M., Ostertag, C. F., Gottret, M. V., Best, R., and Ferris, S. 2005. A Territorial based Approach to Agro-enterprise Development. Strategy Paper. Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical, Cali, Colombia. www.ciat.cgiar.org/agroempresas/ingles/manual_series


31

Identifying strategic development pathways for African agriculture

Prem Bindraban1a, with contributions from: Pieter Vereijken1, Thomas Price2, John Dixon3, Monty Jones4, Herman van Keulen1, Niek

Koning5

Plant Research International The Netherlands, FAO Italy, CIMMYT Mexico,

FARA Ghana, Wageningen University, The Netherlands

Abstract The gap in agricultural productivity between Africa and other global regions is ever widening. Production has not even kept pace with demand for food of the growing population and the number of food insecure people is increasing rather than decreasing. For sub-Saharan Africa, various targets set by the Millennium Development Goals will not be met. This alarming situation has raised political awareness inside and outside Africa to support the development of the agricultural sector. In this regard, Africa is at the crossroad of making strategic choices for its agricultural development. Any production system that could be pursued should target the millions of small and resource poor farmers to ensure widespread development, while it should comply with international standards and developments in agriculture. The understanding of the evolution in agriculture in the developed world that results from external and internal forces is valuable for identifying agricultural development pathways for Africa. This evolution is described on the basis of a conceptual framework that takes objectives or human desire as a starting point, illustrated by a number of typical farming systems, primarily in Europe. African agriculture is diverse and complex with very many farming systems. On the one hand, this diversity may appear to be an asset, while on the other it may have constrained progress in productivity in the past. In this paper, we reason what development pathways could be pursued on the African continent in the context of agricultural policies and developments in production systems outside Africa.

Introduction Agriculture has been very successful in its primary role as food supplier and adequate amounts of food are available globally. Over the past four decades, global food production per person has increased by 27%, despite a doubling of the world population. For sub-Saharan Africa, however, the results have been disappointing: a 12% reduction of food production per person over that same period. An increasing number of people are becoming food insecure which has alarmed African nations and the international community to turn the tide. The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (www.nepad.org) has placed agriculture high on the agenda and the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (www.fara-africa.org) has assumed a coordinating role for stimulating agricultural initiative. The UN has commissioned


32

various studies to identify strategies and approaches, amongst others to support these initiatives. A strategic plan for harnessing science and technology for agricultural development in Africa was developed at the request of UN SG Kofi Annan (InterAcademy Council, 2004) and the Task Force Hunger has developed a plan to combat hunger (UN Millennium Project 2005a). Both international initiatives have drawn heavily on knowledge and expertise from Africa, as a large portion of the panel members were from African countries and as extensive consultations rounds were held. The development of the agricultural sector in Africa should be realized against the background of developments in other global regions and outside the sector. Agriculture in most regions outside Africa has developed dramatically due to advances in technology leading to increased use of external inputs and due to the creation of favourable institutional and economic conditions. Farming systems have become highly intensive with high productivity in terms of land, labour and capital, leading to a steady decline of food prices in an increasingly liberalizing global economy. Increasingly also, concerns for the environment put stricter conditions to production systems, like limits to losses of chemical compounds. This is the mainstream development that is strongly led by policies and economic principles of specialization and economies of scale resulting in ever bigger, technology driven capital intensive farms with a global orientation. At the same time there is a growing demand for less intensive systems which resemble “natural” characteristics, such as a ban on “unnatural” agrochemicals in organic agriculture. Also, non-food functions are incorporated in farm activities like the maintenance of natural and cultural elements in multifunctional agriculture to satisfy consumers need to enjoy nature and landscape. These alternative systems result in less intensive farming with a local orientation. Against this background the development of the agricultural sector in sub-Saharan Africa will be a daunting challenge indeed. The mainstream developments towards specialization, supported during the green revolutions, have not been widely adopted in sub-Saharan Africa. This could have been caused by inappropriate institutional and market conditions as a result of indifferent policies. On the other hand, available technologies may not have been appropriate for the diverse and complex farming systems that are being practices by far the largest portion of the farmers in Africa. Strategies to enhance agricultural productivity should therefore be carefully developed in order to ensure a widespread development in Africa. At the same time, liberalization and concerns outside Africa for the environment, for maintaining biodiversity and landscape should be taken into consideration. Hence, developments in the agricultural sector outside Africa reflect changing desires of societies which will eventually strongly impact development opportunities for Africa. In this paper we will describe the interaction between the evolution of typical forms of farming systems primarily in Europe and changing policies and societal concerns for the environment, nature and landscape as a means to derive strategic options for the development of the agricultural sector in sub-Sahara Africa.


33

2. Evolution in Agricultural Farming Systems (Primarily Europe) 2.1. Agriculture needs to serve ever more objectives

The organisational ability of humans has lead to increasingly sophisticated ways of exploiting natural resources to meet our desires. Agriculture has evolved from gathering and hunting to industrial food production systems that are highly specialized and efficient in resource use. The seemingly evolutionary process over the past millennia has however experience several sudden revolutionary changes caused by the combined effects of technological innovations, policies, changes in social institutions, and improving economic conditions, such as colonization leading to expansion of land areas or the introduction of artificial fertilizers (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. The introduction of a package of advanced technologies comprising improved varieties, fertilizers, machines, crop protecting agents and irrigation along with appropriate policies that shaped institutional and market conditions, led to sudden changes in agricultural productivity. Wheat yields in UK and USA (left) and rice yields in Indonesia (right).

Overall, the desires of consumers have evolved and are increasingly shaping the development of agricultural farming systems. Combining the concept of Maslow and the functions as identified by Vereijken (2002), we have stratified human desires and illustrate how these progressive changes affect agricultural farming systems (Fig. 2). With improving development, the societal pressure to adapt agricultural systems to comply with ever broadening desires will increase the number of objectives to be realized. The first and foremost role of agriculture remains the production of food and other primary bio-based goods. Increasingly food quality becomes important.

3000

2000

1000

(kg/ha)

4000

130

2,5

kg/haper year

1950 1960 1970 1980

year

3000

2000

1000

(kg/ha)

4000

130

2,5

kg/haper year

1950 1960 1970 1980

year


34

A second important objective is the generation of sufficient income through farming activities, except where agriculture is still practised for 'pure' subsistence purposes. The income generated through this work should secure realisation of additional desires than the availability of food alone. Figure 2. Hierarchical order of human desires as related to agriculture and land use based on

the concepts of Maslow and Vereijken (2002).

A third major objective that society desires is care for the environment. Agriculture relies heavily on the natural resource stock and has in turn, a strong impact on stock quality and quantity. Environmental concerns have grown over the past decades and call for either minimising the (negative) impact of agricultural activities on (desirable) environmental characteristics or delimiting the environmental impact through rules and regulation. A forth objective that agriculture has to increasingly comply with is safeguarding the health and wellbeing of both humans and animal. Though it appears difficult in many cases to explicitly identify and define the 'states' of health and well-being, social desire wish to reducing drudgery to farmers and to allow animal to have a “natural life”, such as free-ranging chicken that can scratch. Fifth, the importance of nature is recognized for sustaining our ecosystem as a production base, affirming the need of both the non-use and use function of biological diversity (CBD, 2003;

Food

Work and income

Environment

Health

&

Wellbeing

Nature&

Landscape

Food

Work and income

Environment

Health

&

Wellbeing

Nature&

Landscape


35

Slootweg and Kolhoff, 2003). Related to this nature element, the cultural heritage, often resulting from specific activities in the past on the land, is also valued calling for its preservation. 2.2. Typical farming systems in Europe

The evolution in changing desires directly or indirectly shapes agriculture. Government policies may also shape agriculture, either by taking a leading role, such as in Europe after the Second World War to ensure food security to its population, or by reacting on changing desires from society for instance by setting limits to emissions of agrochemicals responding to environmental concerns. To illustrate the evolution in agricultural farming systems, four typical systems are described, primarily based on the European situation. Conventional agriculture

Gathering and hunting was entirely integrated in nature and landscape but could support relatively low population densities only. Over time, specialisation allowed groups of people to undertake activities other than food production. The basic functions of agriculture to produce food for the urban and rural populations provided work and income for the rural population. Conventional agriculture considers these functions as its main societal objectives, other functions not being explicitly considered. This view of conventional agriculture quite well suited the societal demands in Europe after the Second World War, characterised by insufficient food production and insufficient work and income, especially in rural areas. A similar situation, even more extreme in terms of food shortages, prevailed in developing countries from the 1960’s, and still in many rural areas, where the increasing population has to be fed and employed. In Europe, the agricultural policy of subsidies, guaranteed prices and protection against foreign producers encouraged continuous technological improvements in production methods, resulting in increasing land and labour productivity. As a result, food shortages have turned into food surpluses and labour requirements have drastically been reduced. Because the latter aggravated unemployment and poverty in many rural areas, subsidy regulations and trade protection were adapted but not abandoned, up till now. Still, the EU spends almost half its budget to maintain socio-economic stability in its rural areas. Stricter environmental regulations and the international pressure on trade liberalisation may force current conventional agricultural systems to evolve into systems with a wider scope. In developing countries, a similar objective of increased food production was aimed at, with technical assistance from international agricultural research institutes, primarily the CGIAR (www.cgiar.org). The technical stimuli together with the strong support of policies that favoured agriculture, laid the foundation for the Green Revolution during the 1960’s and 1970’s primarily in Asian countries, resulting in rapid increases in food production. While it prevented massive starvation and falsified all doomsday scenario’s that we would not be able to feed the world population, it did also lead to increased rural unemployment and could not eradicate food insecurity for almost one billion people. During the 1970’s and 1980’s, social and environmental concerns have led to the evolution towards agricultural systems that serve a wider range of objectives.


36


37

Integrated agriculture (High input practices; Low input practices)

To overcome adverse effects of conventional agriculture on the environment, scientists have developed farming systems in which minimisation of adverse environment impacts was included as a third objective besides production and, work and income. Notably the crop protectionists, organised in the International Organisation for Biological and Integrated Control (IOBC) have contributed to these developments (Vereijken et al., 1986, El Titi et al., 1993). They have succeeded in substantially reducing the use of hazardous pesticides in various crops. Integrated agricultural systems demand knowledgeable and skilled farmers and may substantially reduce negative environmental impacts, e.g. by less pesticide and fertiliser use. Integrated agriculture raises awareness and stimulates technological innovation across the entire chain of production, processing, trade and consumption. Use of precision agriculture, biotechnology and ICT are technological drivers for these developments that aim at integration of the positive elements of the various production technologies. As externalities, such as environmental pollution, are not accounted for in the monetary market system, few economic incentives are (made) available to stimulate integrated farming. In most instances reinforcing policies are put in place to limit emissions of agrochemicals leading to a more judicious use of resources. In developing nations, the consequences of the Green Revolution have been strongly criticised by social scientists (cf. Conway & Barbier, 1990). The overriding role of technology in and the high requirements of external inputs of the conventional agricultural systems were questioned. The system of intensive cultivation was blamed for degrading the environment, marginalising small farmers, while favouring well-endowed producers, and neglecting indigenous knowledge. This opinion has favoured development of participatory approaches with emphasis on identification of location-specific problems, input of local knowledge and locally available resources (cf. Defoer, 2000). These approaches focussed on low external input agricultural systems, as it was expected to reduce the dependency on external power structures. It was widely expected that these approaches, using pro-poor technology, would result in improved food security and enhance sustainable development. More than three decades have passed since this low input approach was advocated and implemented, but has not led to noticeable progress in agricultural productivity increase nor in reduced poverty or improved food security. Organic agriculture

To escape from the hazards of ever-higher synthetic-chemical inputs in conventional agriculture, small groups of consumers and farmers have established an alternative chain of production, processing, trade and consumption. It integrates plants and animals and is based on a radical ban on any synthetic-chemical input (IFOAM, 2001). As such, priority is given to mechanical and biological mechanisms in cultivation practices (Codex Alimentarius, 1999). Especially during the last decade have organic agricultural systems gained support and recognition world-wide, favoured by the growing concerns of the suspected hazards of narrow-scoped conventional agriculture, but also favoured by improved skills in the organic chain. Opportunities for this system exist in the developed countries where people can afford to pay premium prices for the perceived safety of the environment and, the health and wellbeing of man


38

and animal. Large-scale break-through of organic agriculture will largely depend on yield improvement and cost reduction in order to make it economically competitive. Multifunctional agriculture The agricultural systems presented so far comply with an increasing number of functions. In further integrating social, economic and ecological objectives the challenge is to combine all functions at farm and/or regional scale. These desires are captured in the concept of multifunctional land use, of which agriculture is a major user of land. It implies the integration of plant and animal production with environmental care, conservation of nature and the composition of landscape, and care for health and wellbeing, including tourism and recreation (see also OECD, 2001a,b; FAO, 1999). Of course, such a broad set of functions cannot be carried by a single farm, because of its limited resources and its limited scale in particular. Only large regions may be able to meet this challenge, based on multifunctional land use, including multifunctional agricultural systems, by a wide array of farms scattered in the landscape. To ensure sufficient work and income, these functions should be marketed through a wide variety of rural products and services, the so-called non-commodity products. For example: drinking water companies paying farmers for 'producing' unpolluted water, local inhabitants and tourists paying for access to and enjoyment of an attractive landscape, governments or NGO’s paying for nature and landscape management, or education and social care of specific groups of children, adults or old-aged citizens on farms (e.g. Hassink and van Dijk, 2006). 2.3. A conceptual framework for developments in agricultural production systems

Hunting and gathering yielded food items in a natural and highly diverse environment. The concentrated production of food emerged with the cultivation of crops and the domestication of animal some ten thousand years ago, giving rise to village communities, trade and development of markets (e.g. Grigg 1974; 1982). As a consequence agriculture moved towards intensive systems with ever higher productivity in terms of land, labour and capital. This mainstream development is firmly led by economic principles of specialization and economies of scale resulting in ever bigger, technology driven capital intensive farms. Increasing concerns for the environment put, however, stricter conditions to production systems, like limits to losses of chemical compounds to the environment. The relative importance of other functions then tends to increase again when these environmental and other dimensions of agriculture are emphasised in order to satisfy new demands for social and other services. The evolution of the multifunctional character of agricultural systems can thus be represented as a U-shaped curve over time, related to economic development and intrinsic transformations of industrial societies (Fig. 3).


39

Figure 3. The evolution of the multifunctional character of agricultural systems in relation to

economic development and intrinsic transformations in industrial societies.

The concept of multiple functions captures the complexity of the wide range of inter-relationships and interactions between the agricultural sector and the environmental, economic and socio-political domains, and helps to describe and understand the evolution of agricultural systems. In sustainability debated this concept is popularized through the People-Planet-Profit concept, i.e. a system will be sustainable only if it complies with all these dimensions. 2.4. Potentials and constraints in valuation of additional functions in agriculture

While agriculture has to comply increasingly with the entire range of social, environmental and economic functions, realising payments for these products and services appear to be cumbersome. Often, products are not tangible and may be important for the society at large, which makes direct payments through market-led economic principles difficult. Competitiveness between agricultural systems therefore falls back to price competition of the directly marketable products and hence on the productivity of land, labour and capital inputs. Integrated agricultural farming systems are being developed with the aim to reduce the environmental burden, while maintaining or even raising productivity. Intensive Dutch dairy farming that has developed over the past decades for instance is highly productive at 8.000 kg cow–1 y–1 or 12.000 kg ha–1 y–1, but with a severe imbalance between inputs of nutrients in purchased fertilisers, concentrates and roughage, and atmospheric deposition versus the outputs in milk and meat. On average the outputs were 14 and 32% of input only, for N and P, respectively, during the 1980’s. The N surplus of approximately 470 kg N ha–1 contributed to

Agriculture for

SubsistenceProduction

Market Development +

A

Market

OrientedProduction

+

B

Market Development

Demand forOtherAmenities

+

C

Market Development

Degree ofDiversity inAgriculture

+

Market Development

Agriculture for



AAgriculture for



A

Market

OrientedProduction

+

B

Market Development

Market

OrientedProduction

+

B

Market Development


+

C

Market Development


+

C

Market Development


+

Market Development


+

Market Development


40

environmental pollution through ammonia volatilisation, run off, leaching of nitrate and production of N2O. The surplus of 32 kg P ha–1 mainly accumulates in the soil, but will eventually lead to saturation and leaching resulting in the loss of one of world’s most vital and scarce minerals. In search for integrating economic and ecological functions, a dairy farm was designed using a system analytical approach. Optimization of the nutrient flows between the arable and animal components of the integrated farm, lead to a drastic reduction in the nutrient inputs to the farms to surpluses not surpassing legal emission levels (Aarts, 2000). While the production and ecological aims were realized, the costs of milk did increase by approximately 5%. To compensate for these expenses, additional income sources are required. Current indirect mechanisms such as compensation from drinking companies for “desiccation” and tax payments to municipals for tourism, could be earmarking and specifically allocated to farmers or groups of farmers that comply to certain management criteria (Aarts, pers. com.). Hence, the driving forces towards integrated agriculture are primarily socio-political, i.e. the enforcement of rules and regulations to comply with social concerns about the environment and to a minor extent economic, such as the reduction in costs of inputs. Organic agriculture has received much political support over the past decades to raise the market share of organically produced items. Subsidies are for instance provided to farmers for transforming their conventional practices to organic. The sector has however gained a small market share only, and is confined to niche-markets, at only 1-2% of the food market in the Netherlands or even less in Belgium, up to maximally 7% in Austria (Smits and Koole, 2002). Major limitations are the higher prices of organic foods as a result of significantly lower labour and land productivity. Controlling weeds for instance, is a highly labour intensive exercise. Land productivity in the Netherlands reaches only about half the productivity of integrated systems, while drawing heavily on the accumulated nutrients in the soils and on nutrient inputs from animal manure, in order to close the nutrient balance. Bos et al. (2005) shows that cereal yields of 5.5 ton ha–1 can only be sustained when nitrogen produced by legumes from an additional hectare of land supports the nitrogen balance. Indeed a yield level of 2.5 ton ha–1 grain equivalents was estimated as the highest attainable yield in organic agriculture (WRR, 1995). Though various favourable aspects of organic farming are being reported (e.g. Cobb et al., 1999) the ecological, social and economic sustainability of organic agriculture is increasingly being questioned (e.g. Elliot and Mumford, 2002). Basically emissions per area unit are lower in organic farmer than in conventional or integrated farming, while emissions are higher per unit product (e.g. Basset-Mens and van der Werf, 2005), implying that emissions are spread out over larger areas as yields are lower. Further, there are no proofs of other perceived benefits, such as higher biodiversity on organic farms or healthier product quality (e.g. Trewavas, 2004). Multifunctionality has to be realised at field, farm and regional scale. At field levels, farmers may maintain a wide uncultivated border row to allow weeds and flowers to flourish as a habitat for birds and bees etc. At the farm level, farmers combine land and water structure, replant areas with trees etc., while government bodies may coordinate the combination of functions at the regional level. The willingness of consumers to pay for most of the additional functions supplied by agriculture is limited, and the current market mechanism are inadequate to support such


41

payments. Incorporation of all these practices in farm operations imply a loss of production area which needs to be compensated for either by income paid by the services provided or by subsidies. The impact of measures aimed at multifunctionality on sustainability and conservation of nature is disputable. Kleijn et al. (2001) found no positive effect on plant and bird species by comparing 78 paired fields with an agri-environmental scheme and conventionally managed farms in the Netherlands. The agri-environmental protection schemes aimed to conserve biodiversity in intensively managed agricultural landscapes, by specific management measures such as postponement of agricultural activities (e.g. mowing of grassland allowing birds to safely hatch their chickens) and restrictions in the use of fertilisers (to conserve species rich vegetation in grasslands). Hodgson and colleagues (2005) recommend, based on studies on grassland flora in England, to assign less suitable lands for conservation purposes, as agriculturally favourable area are taken into cultivation despite environmentally friendly policies. 3. African Agricultural Farming Systems and Future Strategies The developments in agriculture outside Africa set global standards for prices of food and non-food items, trade conditions and quality requirements, and directly or indirectly affect African agriculture and development opportunities. Strategic development pathways for African agriculture should therefore be designed in view of these developments, while African leaders could more forcefully intervene in these global issues to create conditions that favour the development of their own agriculture. In this section current African systems will be described, followed by two divergent pathways in agricultural productions systems to reach the majority of African farmers as a basis for identifying strategies for African agriculture. 3.1 Current African agricultural farming systems

The biophysical conditions put severe limits to African crop and animal production, especially outside the forest zones. Much of the continent has infertile weathered soils (Eswaran et al 1997) and much less fertile alluvial and volcanic soils compared to Asia (Voortman et al 2000). Severe pest and disease pressure, lethal animal diseases, and an erratic water supply further jeopardize land productivity (Asiema 1994). The intense geographical variation in mineral content of soils necessitates location-specific fertilization strategies to optimize impact on productivity (Smaling 1993). Along with these adverse conditions, a low population-to-land ratio provides only a modest capability to intensively control biophysical conditions per unit area – e.g., by practicing intensive weeding or by specializing production. Due to these conditions, an extremely wide range of interspersed crops and cropping systems have developed across Africa (Dixon et al 2001). Small-holder farms develop their specific systems to deal with their environmental diversity by matching crops and crop mixtures to the variations in the immediate biophysical environment. In addition, socio-economic, institutional and cultural factors, such as family circumstance, communal use or private land rights, and distance from the household compound to the field or market, further shape the characteristics of the farming systems. As a result, most individual farmers in sub-Saharan Africa cultivate some 10 to 15 food and cash crops in a wide array of mixtures, often in combination with animal. Such


42

mixed-cropping systems tend to diminish risk, reduce crop losses from pests and diseases, and makes efficient use of farm labour (e.g. Lhoste and Richard, 1993; Rabot, 1990; Sissoke, 1998). Dixon et al (2001) provide the most comprehensive description of the farming systems currently being practices globally. They identify and broadly delimit these systems based on criteria that include the natural-resource base, dominant livelihoods, the degree of crop-livestock integration, and the scale of operation. Using this classification, Dixon reveals a larger number of farming systems on the African continent than in other global regions. In addition, these systems in Africa are proportionally equal in terms of land coverage and fraction of people depending on them, none exceeding 15%. On the contrary, over 40% of the population in East Asia depends on lowland rice cultivation, and over 50% on rice and rice-wheat systems in South Asia, dominating agriculture. The description of farming systems provide a snapshot only of dynamic systems that are constantly evolving, under both endogenous and exogenous factors, following a recognizable pathway (Fig. 2). For African agriculture, systems that are originally based on hand hoes, for instance, may evolve via the use of cattle for draught power to intensification and specialization with external inputs. At any one location within a farming system, different farms are likely to be at different stages because of differences in resource base, family goals, capacity to bear risk, or degree of market access. Meanwhile, apart from evolutionary processes, there is always the possibility of “revolution”: completely new alternatives may arise due to technological and institutional innovations. Advanced technologies could also be simply transferred to Africa, such as the cultivation of flower in Kenya by Dutch flower growers. More pronounced strategies to leap frog development can be found in China where latest high technology greenhouses from the Netherlands are constructed. Some 10% of agriculture in Africa is specialized with large potentials for enhancing total bulk food production, such as in the Gazira - Sudan (Ahmed et al. 2000; Ahmed and Sanders 1998), cereal cultivation in Zimbabwe and South Africa, and rice cultivation along the Niger. The largest improvements in productivity increase in Africa have occurred in mono-crop fields. These findings are in line with the global model of increased specialization to increase productivity, implicitly suggesting that the transition from diversified systems to mono-cropping appears an effective development pathway to enhance productivity. Specialized farming systems are likely to add much value to agriculture, contribute to food production and help to develop internationally competitive systems. In such systems agronomic measures are fine-tuned in time and space to the specific needs of that particular crop, and high yields of crops per unit area can be obtained. Also, labour productivity can be greatly enhanced, as available technologies are geared towards this aim. Hence, much of the improvements can be obtained through the adaptation and adoption of technologies 'on the shelf' – following the strategy of the green revolutions. Mono-crops or cropping systems with few specialized crops is however, much less appropriate in Africa than in other continents. It is unlikely that the transformation towards specialization will


43

occur within one generation for almost 90 percent of the African farmers who currently are engaged in diversified farming systems. A preferred path could be the stepwise upgrading and improvement of the productivity of diversified systems by exploiting synergies and other advantages. This strategy would take Africa along a more diversified path of modernization than was pursued in Europe in the 1950s and Asia in the 1960s. 3.2 Perceived benefits from diversified systems

Small-holder farms have developed their complex diversified systems to cope with the harsh biophysical and socio-economic conditions, giving low but stable production and hence, diminishing risk. These systems are efficient with regard to the objective of securing food supply, but do also constrain progress towards systems with substantially higher production. Attempts to improve their productivity in the past, generally emphasizing low-external input levels, have not led to noticeable reduction of food insecurity or poverty, though some isolated successes have been reported. Incorporation of advanced technological solutions into the participatory technology development has to be explored to upgrade the system productivity. There is, however, a lack of systematic analysis that embraces all the facets of crop and animal production in complex diversified systems. This is true for our understanding concerning the production ecological concepts of mixed systems at field scale, such as intercropping. Optimization of natural resources management also needs to be addressed spatially at the farm scale. In addition, optimal use of resources at the regional scale, such as watersheds that have to be managed by communities or by stakeholder platforms call for different institutional operations. Enhancement of the productivity of diversified systems in search for combining various functions has to be address at various scales. The complex mixtures of crops and animals have to be taken as the benchmark when seeking opportunities for improvement. In this section elements that should be considered in designing desired farming systems will be discussed for the field, farm and regional scale. General . In the past attention has been paid to the improvement of major crops rice, wheat, maize and potato that account for over 70% of the bulk food intake in all global regions, except Africa, where they account for some 35% only. To enhance the productivity of African agriculture, specific attention should be paid to improve the crops and animals specific to that continent. Field scale In specialized systems single functions are assigned to fields, where mono-cropping facilitates mechanized operations and high productivity is obtained in terms of land, labour and capital. African farmers grow several crops in single plots, often not geometrically optimized which is difficult to mechanize. It is assumed that the combined growth of two or more crops could make more effective use of natural resources (e.g., light and water) and added resources (e.g., fertilizer) raising productivity of the entire system, because of optimized sharing of resources by the various crops over time and space. There is no systematic insight however in these benefits,


44

and various combinations may even exacerbate drought or disease and pest incidence (e.g. Keating and Carberry, 1993; Marshall and Willey, 1983; Morris and Garrity, 1993; Trenbath, 1993; Tsubo and Walker, 2002). Therefore, best technical means for diversified systems will be different from mono cropping and existing technologies geared to specialized cropping may need to be adapted or entirely new technologies will have to be devised. Crops may for instance require different characteristics like altered leaf morphology, rooting depth, pest and disease resistance, etc. Only recently, has a model been developed to systematically assess the impact of crop combinations on disease dissemination and infestation (e.g. Skelsey et al., 2005). Similarly, no priority has been placed on the development of machines equipped to harvest two or more crops simultaneously or to harvest a single crop in a mixture. But unless mechanization is made appropriate to diversified farming systems, their land and labour productivity will remain virtually stagnant at their low level. The above illustrates the complexity of mixed systems and reveals our limited knowledge and insight in production-ecological terms of these systems. Better insights are needed to upgrade their productivity and to devise appropriate technologies. While in the past much emphasis has been placed in increasing the productivity of intercropping systems by making use of cheap tools made of locally available resources, a real breakthrough may require the use of advanced technologies including breeding specifically geared to mixed systems, specific fertilizer combinations and even remote and close sensing for multipurpose machines. Farm scale Natural resources are management such as to concentrate soil fertility nearer to the farm house, indicating priority decisions made by the farmers (e.g. Prudencio, 1993; Ruthenberg, 1980). Little is known about the way these gradients affect resource use efficiency and the way that management reinforces rather than decreases the gradient. Recent work tries to explore farm-scale dynamics in terms of trade-offs at farm scale between spatial allocation of resources and temporal trade-offs between short-term yields and long-term sustainability (Giller, 2002; Tittonell, 2003). The adoption of many technology options derived from past research has been disappointing, possibly because the technologies are assessed at the crop or livestock activity level only, which may not have matched the complex and multiple goals of a farm household. African crop and animal production is practiced under virtually no input. Many have tried to increase the productivity of these systems with limited external inputs, often from locally available sources. In relative terms substantial improvements may be achieved, such as increase in yield of cereals from 1 to 2 tons per hectare, but these gains are still minor in absolute terms while adoption is disappointingly low because of disproportional labour requirements. Ouédraogo and colleagues (2001) for instance tripled sorghum yields by applying up to 10 tonnes of compost, but farmers lacked equipment and animals to generate these amounts of compost and the excessive labour requirement constrained adoption. De Jager (2001) shows the unsustainable negative nutrient balance of low-external-input farming and of conventional farming with only limited inorganic fertilizers for the Machakos district of Kenya. The use of legumes to enhance productivity could be promising, but their role will be highly varied due to strong environmental effects on nitrogen fixation such as the high requirement of phosphorus in


45

the soil, while most African soils lack this nutrient (Giller, 2001; Franco and Munns, 1982). Obviously, new approaches are required to significantly upgrade the productivity of the farming systems where the input of external sources is essential for enhancing the soils fertility and for reducing drudgery. Regional level Optimal use of resources at regional scale and the maintenance of certain functions in the landscape, such as biodiversity, require strong coordination where the interests of individuals or households should be safeguard. This is intended in multi-stakeholder platforms, but participants reveal limited flexibility and rigidly adhere to their own interests, ideas and perceptions and expect solutions that support their ideas at the initiation of platform meetings. Only when value added can be generated through collaborative action, sustainable solutions may be obtained. Scientific insights and arguments on the economic, ecological and hydrological aspects of the systems at basin level, for instance, have proven valuable for the convergence of ideas (e.g. Bindraban et al., 2005). Meijerink and colleagues (2003) have introduced methods to assess the trade-offs and synergies in land cover change on production and ecological functions. Rapid land expansion for production purposes and limited use of inputs lead to widespread environmental degradation, undermining the natural base for future production. Planning tools could support a more balanced approach to both enhance productivity and sustain natural lands. For such complex matters to be addressed sustainably, novel institutional arrangement are needed to properly manage regional resources under a situation of increasing pressure due to increasing population and reducing availability of natural resources. In the Netherlands, Vereijken and colleagues (pers. comm.) have arranged various functions in a small watershed by diverting water from the river through a reed field that extracts nutrients and purifies the water, while the reed is harvested for bio-fuel or for use in greenhouses after processing, while tourists can enjoy the scenic landscape. This concept could be helpful in African countries, as multiple objectives can be served, such as purifying water for drinking while extracting nutrients from rivers. 3.3 Competitiveness

By no means is it, however, expected that complex diversified systems will exceed the yield and productivity levels of specialized systems. The gap in productivity of land, labour and capital between specialized and diversified systems should be closed as much as possible, while valuation of additional functions present in diversified systems could further bridge the divide (Fig. 4).


46

Figure 4. Bridging the gap between specialized and diversified systems through upgrading of

productivity and valuation of additional functions.

The need for a strategy to upgrade the productivity of diversified systems is high. Farm households can improve their livelihoods when they will be able to gain access to markets, while ensuring their food security. Risks due to market failures, such as volatile prices resulting from uncontrolled trade, or otherwise, can push entrepreneurial farmers back into subsistence and even into poverty. In various instances, have farmers reverted to subsistence farming or to production of food crops for own consumption after a failed attempt to produce for the market, such as cotton in Uganda. Combining the production of various products to meet the food security objectives of these farmers and to allow them to generate money by marketing some of their products, could serve as a stepping stone towards more market oriented farming systems. The diversified systems could even become competitive when the additional functions could be marketed as well, such as the maintenance of biodiversity, the fixation of carbon in soils, and the more sustainable way of production for instance because of reduced use of biocide in crop mixtures. Basically, farmers are concerned with the basic objectives of food security and income generation, while their production systems would intrinsically inherit higher order objectives. 4. Policy Implications for an Enabling Environment The farming systems described for Europe and Africa provide a snapshot only of dynamic systems that are constantly evolving. Both endogenous factors (household goals, labour, technologies in use, and the resource base) and exogenous factors (market development, shifts in demand, agricultural services and policies, the dissemination of new technologies and the availability of market and policy information) drive the evolution of individual farms and, collectively, the overall farming system and the regional allocation of functions. As these pathways evolve as a result of changes in the endogenous and exogenous factors, they can be manipulated. The most pressing question is whether and how the bulk of the African farmers can

Sp

ec

ialize

d s

yst

em

Div

ers

ifie

d s

ys

tem

Current levels in productivity

Upgraded productivity diversified systems

Valuation of additional functions

Sp

ec

ialize

d s

yst

em

Div

ers

ifie

d s

ys

tem

Current levels in productivity

Upgraded productivity diversified systems

Valuation of additional functions


47

upgrade the productivity of their complex systems while generating income from their highly diverse production systems, and what supportive measures and actions are needed from policies. In Europe, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) aimed at meeting its domestic objectives of food self-sufficiency, stimulated production which bolstered specialization and commercialization of agriculture. During the mid-1980’s only 25% of the EU-farmers contributed to 80% of total production, food surpluses placed a heavy burden on the agricultural budget for storage, international criticism rose on export subsidies and environmental concerns called for a change in policy. A new CAP had to cut production and simultaneously stimulate alternative sources of income to those farmers who could not compete in an increasingly liberalizing market. This cultural-political context was needed to sustain the “fabric of rural society” by diversifying the functions of the rural area, while reducing the environmental burden of agriculture. While economic forces tend to increasingly dominate the fate of agricultural development pushing it into specialization and large scales operations, non-monitory considerations are primarily stimulated by policy measures leading to diversified systems, to some extent responding to the changing desires of Europeans along the Maslov Pyramid (Fig. 2). The consequences of these policies may involve fierce repercussions for third countries. Currently, direct support to farmers and import tariffs by income subsidies are gradually being replaced by subsidies to stimulate “sustainable use and maintenance” of the land and other resources (notably biodiversity), and high quality requirements of import items and Intellectual Property Rights. Some argue that these conditions put even stronger constraints to third (developing) countries to access the European market and therefore becoming even stronger and more effective means to protect European agriculture. There is, for instance, much anecdotal evidence that quality requirements hamper food import to Europe, such as of fish from Lake Victoria, Sardines, Catfish, Camel cheese, GMO’s and hormones in beef. Otsuki et al. (2001) for instance shows that stricter EU standards of aflatoxin compared to those set by the international standard of the Codex Alimentarius Commission will reduce the health risk by approximately 1.4 deaths per billion a year, while decreasing exports from Africa by US$ 670 million. The agricultural policies of Europe (and other OECD countries) do not only deprive African countries and farmers from export opportunities, but also drive poor farmers out of business. Subsidies on cereals in Europe reduce the production costs of chicken which are exported to African markets, leading to a collapse of the local poultry industry. Moreover, developing countries do not have the financial means and institutional ability to install similar rules and regulations to safeguard a desired development of their own agricultural sector. In view of the above analyses of agricultural development, where Europe served as an example, African agriculture faces fierce competition on its own territory and needs to meet ever stricter conditions for exporting its goods. Like with the broad pallet of production systems in Europe, African countries may need to search for an array of production systems to comply with various objectives.


48

Productivity increase in Africa in the last few decades has mainly taken place in systems of mono-cultivation, for example of irrigated rice and commercial cereal production. To be able to use the currently available technology packages, the mixed systems have been transformed into mono-systems. This development is in line with the trend towards global production systems where extensive mechanisation and input use increases land and labour productivity. These developments serve a number of purposes, such as ensuring the production of bulk crops and generating foreign exchange through export. Other pathways for enhancing its agriculture should be found in upgrading the productivity of mixed systems, in order to meet the remaining 90% of the farmers in Africa. Available technologies, geared to mono-systems, are not appropriate for these systems and it is therefore not surprising that African farmers have not embraced existing techniques unconditionally and that productivity in the current mixed systems is stagnating. In addition to stimulating the development of appropriate (high) technologies, the international developments and concerns could be used to further stimulate agricultural productivity of mixed systems. The biodiversity of mixed systems is for instance higher that of mono-systems, but the trade-off with productivity results in economic disadvantage that can be overcome only when the higher biodiversity index is valued and paid for. Likewise, specific attention can be placed on enhancing the sequestration of carbon that could be traded internationally. Labelling can be used to distinguish certain product quality and methods of production to ensure additional payments. Even if all these measures are utilized, economic competitiveness may still be limited and protective measures may be necessary to prevent mixed systems from degrading and pushing farmers into a spiral of unsustainability. Special measures in WTO negotiations will have to be called upon to this aim. African policies have to assume a catalyzing role for developing African agriculture and for exploiting the international opportunities. All tools available, such as the blue box in the WTO, Clean Development Mechanism and Convention on Biodiversity should be used to support agriculture, while vice versa governments should actively shape international rules and regulations that jeopardize their development opportunities, such as too strict quality criteria. Reduced use of pesticides during production because of the diverse nature of the system could become an element or indicator for labelled “sustainability” and receive a premium price. Indeed institutional capabilities to strongly interfere in international negotiations are limited, but nations could start by raising such issues in Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs). These papers are supposed to describe the macroeconomic, structural and social policies and identify programmes to promote growth, and to sets out policies that comprise a comprehensive strategy for achieving poverty reduction, while indicating associated external financing needs. Bindraban and colleagues (2003; 2004) disappointingly reveals however that virtually no developing country claim these rights and opportunities to favour their own development, likely because of the limited knowledge and insight in the international issues.


49

5. Closing Remark The Millennium Development Goals are only going to be met by countries that have experienced a green revolution (UN Millennium Project, 2005b). This conclusion points to the necessity to first ensure a development of society at large through agriculture that safeguards food availability but also creates the necessary social and human capital to develop the industry and service sector. Countries that have neglected their agriculture are trapped in a poverty spiral as the first step on the “economic ladder” is not developed. Most African countries will not be able to meet the MDG’s and end human suffering within a foreseeable future. Where most countries emphasized the development of the industrial sector, expecting the generated income to ensure food security, they are at the crossroad of making strategic choices in agricultural development as a means to kill hunger and eradicate poverty. African nations should to this aim benefit from its wide diversity of farming systems by linking to international concerns for maintaining biodiversity, reducing emissions, sequestering carbon, and reducing the use of agro-chemicals. Governments should assume a catalyzing role to exploit these options and set appropriate conditions in their country. Poor governance and inappropriate market conditions are currently seen by many to be the prime causes of poor agricultural development and need to be improved indeed, the adaptation of technologies and design of entirely new ones to suit the complex production systems of the majority of the African farmers is likely to be of equal importance in enhancing the productivity of African agriculture. References Aarts, H.F.M. 2000. Resource management in a ‘De Marke’ dairy farming system. Wageningen

University, Wageningen, The Netherlands. PhD-thesis, 222 pp. Ahmed, M.M. and J.H. Sanders 1998. Shifting from Extensive to Intensive Agricultural Systems:

A Case Study in the Sudan. Agricultural Systems 58, 253-268. Ahmed, M.M., J.H. Sanders and W.T. Nell 2000. New Sorghum and Millet Cultivar Introduction

in Sub-Saharan Africa: Impacts and Research Agenda. Agricultural Systems 64, 55-65. Asiema, J. 1994. Africa’s Green Revolution. Biotechnology and Developmental Monitor 19, 17-

18. Basset-Mens, C. and H.M.G. van der Werf 2005. Scenario-based environmental assessment of

farming systems: the case of pig production in France. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 105, 127-144.

Bindraban P.S., M. Silvius, J. Warner 2005. Switching channels: Challenging the mainstream. Water for Food and Ecosystems. Partners for Water. Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Bindraban, P.S., H.L. Aalbers, H.A.J. Moll, I.D. Brouwer, A. Besselink and V.M.J. Grispen 2004. Biodiversity, agro-biodiversity, international trade and food safety in CCA and PRSP country reports. Major issues of development in the UN System Common Country Assessments and World Bank Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers. Wageningen University and Research Centre. Plant Research International report 76. http://www.plant.wur.nl/downloads/rapport_76.pdf


50

Bindraban, P.S., H.L. Aalbers, H.A.J. Moll, I.D. Brouwer, M. van Dorp, C.B. Houtman, M.L. Brouwer, M.M.M. Zuurbier and E.C.M. Hagenaars 2003. Focus on food security. A review of the UN System Common Country Assessments and World Bank Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and Wageningen University and Research Centre (Wageningen UR). Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/006/Y5095E/Y5095E00.HTM

Bos, J.F.F.P. (ed.) 2005. Intersectorale samenwerking in de biologische landbouw: bouwstenen voor een zelfvoorzienende biologische landbouw. Wageningen Universiteit en Research Centrum/Louis Bolk Instituut, Wageningen/Driebergen, 54 pp. (Intersectoral collaboration in organic agriculture; Building blocks for a self-sustaining organic agriculture.)

CBD [Convention on Biological Diversity] 2003. http://www.biodiv.org/ Cobb, D., R. Feber, A. Hopkins et al. 1999. Integrating the environmental and economic

consequences of converting to organic agriculture: evidence from a case study. Land Use Policy 16, 207-221.

Codex Alimentarius 1999. Guidelines for the production, processing, labelling and marketing of organically produced foods. Commission of the Codex Alimentarius, CAC/GL 32.

Conway, G.R. and E.B. Barbier 1990. After the green revolution. Sustainable agriculture for development. Earthscan Publ. Ltd., London, UK.

Defoer, T. 2000. Moving methodologies. Learning about integrated soil fertility management in sub-Saharan Africa. PhD-Thesis Wageningen University. Wageningen, the Netherlands. 189 pp.

De Jager, A., D. Onduru, M. S. van Wijk, J. Vlaming, and G. N. Gachini 2001. Assessing Sustainability of Low-External-Input Farm Management Systems with the Nutrient Monitoring Approach: A Case Study in Kenya. Agricultural Systems 69, 99-118.

Dixon, J., A. Gulliver, and D. Gibbon 2001. Farming Systems and Poverty. Improving Farmers’ Livelihoods in a Changing World. Rome and Washington D.C.: FAO and World Bank.

Elliot, S.L. and J.D. Mumford 2002. Organic, integrated and conventional apple production: why not consider the middle ground? Crop protection 21, 427-429.

El Titi, A., Boller E.F. and J.P. Gendrier 1993. Integrated production, principles and technical guidelines. Publication of the Commission: IP-guidelines and endorsement. I0BC/WPRS Bulletin no. 16, 96 pp.

Eswaran, H., R. Almaraz, P. Reich, and P. Zdruli, 1997. Soil Quality and Soil Productivity in Africa. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 10, 75-94.

FAO, 1999. Cultivating our futures. Issues Paper, FAO/Netherlands Conference on the Multifunctional Character of Agriculture and land, 12-17 September 1999. Maastricht, The Netherlands. FAO, Rome.

Giller, K.E. 2001. Nitrogen Fixation in Tropical Cropping Systems. 2nd Edition. CAB International, London U.K.

Giller, K.E. 2002. In Search of the Middle Ground. Inaugural speech at Wageningen University and Research Center, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Franco, A.A. and Munns, D.N. 1982. Nodulation and growth of Phaseolus vulgaris L. in solution culture. Plant and Soil 66,149–160.


51

Grigg, D.B. 1974. The agricultural systems of the world. An evolutionary approach. Cambridge University Press. 358 pp.

Grigg, D. 1982. The dynamics of agricultural change. The historical experience. Hutchinson, London. 260 pp.

Hassink, J. and M. van Dijk 2006. Farming for Health across Europe, comparison between countries. Farming for Health. J. Hassink and M. van Dijk (Eds.). Springer. In press. ( www.wur/frontis.nl/publications)

Hodgson, J.G., J.P. Grime, P.J. Wilson, K. Thompson and S.R. Band 2005. The impact of agricultural change (1963-2003) on the grassland flora of central England: processes and prospects. Basic and Applied Ecology 6, 107-118.

IFOAM 2001. Basic standards and criteria for accreditation (www.ifoam.org). InterAcademy Council 2004. Realizing the promise and potential of African agriculture. Science

and technology strategies for improving agricultural productivity in Africa. IAC report. (http://www.interacademycouncil.net/)

Keating B.A. and P.S. Carberry 1993. Resource Capture and Use in Intercropping: Solar Radiation. Field Crops Research 34, 273-301.

Kleijn, D., Berendse, F., Smit, R. and Gillisen, N. 2001. Agri-environment schemes do not effectively protect biodiversity in Dutch agricultural landscapes. Nature 413, 723-725.

Lhoste, P. et D. Richard, 1993. Contribution de l''elevage à la gestion de la fertilité à l'échelle du terroir. Reseau erosion bulletin 14, 463-48.

Marshall, B. and R.W. Willey 1983. Radiation interception and growth in an intercrop of pearl millet/groundnut. Field Crops Research 7, 141-160.

Meijerink, G., W. Andah, K. Asubonteng, G. Bolfrey-Arku, J. Haleegoah, K. Marfo and E.W. Otoo (Eds.) 2003. Agricltural and natural production systems in the Ashanti region of Ghana. Research Report 2003-01 (VINVAL). Agricultural Economics Institute, The Hague, The Netherlands. http://www.north-south.nl/index.php/item/362

Morris, R.A. and D.P. Garrity 1993. Resource Capture and Utilization in Intercropping: Non-Nitrogen Nutrients. Field Crops Research 34, 319-334.

OECD, 2001a: Multifunctionality, towards an analytical framework. 160 p. (www.oecd.org/agr/mf)

OECD, 2001b: Multifunctionality: Applying the OECD Analytical Framework Guiding Policy Design (www.oecd.org/agr/mf).

Otsuki, T., J.S. Wilson and M. Sewadeh 2001. Saving two in a billion: quantifying the trade effect of European food safety standards on African exports. Food Policy 26, 495-514.

Ouédraogo, E., Mando, A. and Zombré, N.P. 2001. Use of compost to improve soil properties and crop productivity under low-input agricultural systems in West Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment 84, 259–266.

Prudencio, C.F. 1993. Ring management of soils and crops in the West African semi-arid tropics: the case of the Mossi farming system in Burkina Faso. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 47, 237-264.

Rabot, C. 1990. Transfert de fertilité et gestion de terroirs. Les cahiers de la Recherche-Développement 25, 19-32.

Ruthenberg, H. 1980. Farming Systems in the Tropics, 3rd/Ed. Clarendon Press, Oxford.


52

Sissoko, K. 1998. Et Demain l’Agriculture? Options Techniques et Mesures Politiques pour un Développement Agricole Durable en Afrique Subsaharienne: Cas du Cercle de Koutiala en Zone Sud du Mali. PhD-thesis. Wageningen University, The Netherlands.

Skelsey, P., W.A.H. Rossing, G.J.T. Kessel, J. Powell and W. van der Werf, 2005. Phytopathology 95, 328-338.

Slootweg, R. and A. Kolhoff, 2003. A generic approach to integrate biodiversity considerations in screening and scoping for EIA. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 23, 657-681.

Smaling, E.M.A. 1993. An Agro-Ecological Framework for Integrated Nutrient Management with Special Reference to Kenya. Ph.D. thesis. Wageningen University.

Smits, M.J.W. and B. Koole 2002. Arbeidsknelpunten en groei biologische landbouw. Een verkenning van oplossingsrichtingen. (Bottlenecks in labour and growth of organic agriculture.) Rapport 6.02.09. Agricultural Economics Institute, The Hague, The Netherlands.

Tittonell, P. 2003. Soil Fertility Gradients in Smallholder Farms in Western Kenya: Their Origin, Magnitude, and Importance. M.Sc. thesis. Dept. of Plant Science. Wageningen University, The Netherlands.

Trenbath, B.R. 1993. Intercropping for the Management of Pests and Diseases. Field Crops Research 34, 381-405.

Trewavas, A. 2004. A critical assessment of organic farming-and-food assertion with particular respect to the UK and the potential environmental benefits of no-till agriculture. Crop Protection 23, 757-781.

Tsubo, M. and S. Walker 2002. A Model of Radiation Interception and Use by a Maize-Bean Intercrop Canopy. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 110, 203-215.

UN Millennium Project 2005a. Halving hunger: It can be done. Task Force on Hunger. New York.

UN Millennium Project 2005b. Investing in Development. A practicle plan to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. New York.

Vereijken, P.H. 2002. Transition to multifunctional land use and agriculture. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 50, 171-179.

Vereijken, P., C.A. Edwards, A. El Titi, A. Fougeroux and M. Way, 1986. Report of the study group: Management of farming systems for Integrated Control. IOBC/WPRS Bulletin no. 9.

Voortman, R.L., B.G.J.S. Sonneveld, and M.A. Keyzer. 2000. African Land Ecology: Opportunities and Constraints for Agricultural Development. CID Working Paper No. 37.

WRR (1995). Sustained risks: a lasting phenomenon. Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy. Reports to the Government 44. The Hague, the Netherlands.


53

Aiding Decision Making in Transition to Integrated Farming Systems in Small Watersheds in Northeast Thailand

Through a Multi-Agent Systems Model

J.S. Caldwell, Uchada Sukchan, Francois Bousquet, Christophe Le Page, Kenji Suzuki, Nongluck Suphanchaimat and Somsak Sukchan

Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS) Thailand and Japan,

International Training Center for Agricultural Development Thailand, CIRAD France, Khon Kaen University Thailand, Land development Department, Thailand

Abstract Two MAS models for diversification were developed with farmers who grow rice in rainfed paddies and sugarcane in upland fields in mini-watersheds. The first model was based on choices in a research agenda setting process made by 39 farmers with farm ponds and fruit, vegetable, or cattle production. This model begins from farmer assessment of well-being, followed by assessment of capital and pond water. The model postulates that farmers will begin diversification by expansion of cattle raising. This model was based on four orientations of farmers: conventional (rice / sugarcane), vegetable / fruit, livestock, and integrated farming. A second model for farmers with a vegetable / fruit orientation was based on interactions with four wet season on-farm trial farmers in the integrated farming group. This model assessed which plots would be suitable for diversification based on toposequence and pond proximity; selected crops based on sugarcane price, base pond water need, and household funds for investment in technology to increase water availability; selected vegetables based on price and rainfall; and decided upon vegetable technology based on household funds for investment. Both models are written in Unified Modeling Language (UML), and will be used to explore potential aggregate effects of diversification options.

Introduction In Northeast Thailand, only 5% of agricultural land has large-scale irrigation (Limpinantana, 2001), and most farmers practice rainfed agriculture on gently undulating terrain forming mini-watersheds. In valley bottoms, farmers grow rice in rainfed paddies for subsistence. In uplands on each side of the paddies, farmers grow sugarcane and cassava as cash crops. These crops are well-suited to Northeast Thailand, which is characterized by sandy soils (80% of agricultural soils, Yuvaniyama, 2001) and sharply delineated wet and dry seasons. However, sugar cane is a high input crop, resulting in significant borrowing, and farmers must sell to local mills, so farmers lack economic independence. Farmers would like to increase their economic options in agriculture. Vegetables, fruit, and livestock are potential diversification options, but they require more water than sugarcane or cassava. Many farm ponds have been built in the past decade, but they are not well-utilized for diversification (Ando, 2003). Water and markets have common resource characteristics. Within farms, pond water for diversification alternatives can compete with water needs for subsistence rice. Across farms, extensive pond water use by many farms may affect mini-watershed hydrology. Lacombe


54

(2003) found through simulation of hydrological effects in an MAS model that farm ponds would be less effective for early rice seeding if many farmers simultaneously decided to use pond water to seed early. Similarly, when many farmers decide to produce a new product to take advantage of a market opportunity, the result may be flooding of the market and less income for all farmers. A multiagent systems (MAS) model can assist farmer decision making in two ways: 1. To anticipate likely negative aggregate effects of individual decisions; 2. Serve as a catalyst for farmer knowledge sharing, understanding of common resources, and

more efficient organization. To achieve these objectives, farmer decision-making must first be translated into a model that can be verified with farmers and then used by them. In this paper we report how we translated decision-making by farmers in on-farm research into an MAS model for diversification. Our overall objective is to provide farmers with a complementary tool to assess longer-term effects of new technical options tested in on-farm research. Site and Methods The site for development of these MAS models are two villages in Tambon (sub-district) Nong Saeng, Ampoe (district) Ban Haet, Khon Kaen Province, Thailand. From May to September 2003, an interdisciplinary team (livestock, vegetables, fruit, integrated farming, soil /water management, farm management) designed and carried out a research agenda setting process in the site. Sixty farms with farm ponds carrying out fruit, vegetable, or cattle production were identified from a survey of the 207 farm households in the site and invited to participate in the research agenda setting process (Sukchan et al., 2005). The process had two principal objectives: 1) identification of farmers’ goals and research needs; 2) formation of farmer experimental groups (Ashby et al. 2002). The choices made by farmers in the research agenda setting process formed the basis for a first MAS model. This model was based on four orientations of farmers: conventional (rice and sugarcane only), vegetable / fruit, livestock, and integrated farming. This model was considered to be a metamodel that will encompass models for each orientation’s decision-making. On-farm experiments involving vegetable and fruit crops and monitoring of pond water use for vegetables, fruit, and rice began on four farms in the integrated farming group in May 2004. Interaction between researchers and farmers during the course of this on-farm experimentation formed the primary source of understanding of farmer decision-making used in a second MAS model. Both models were written in Unified Modeling Language (UML) (Le Page and Bommel, 2005) in February 2005. Three types of UML were written: 1. Class diagram, indicating attributes and activities of agents and objects, and relationships

among the agents and objects. 2. Decision tree, indicating criteria and results of farmer decisions.


55

3. Sequence diagram showing decisions by agents on objects projected over time. Results and Discussion The metamodel (fig. 1) begins from farmer assessment of well-being as a first condition for an orientation towards diversification, followed by assessment of capital and pond water available for diversification. The metamodel postulates that farmers will begin diversification by expansion of cattle raising. Integrated farming made up nearly 40% of the goals of the farmers in the research agenda setting process. However, nearly half of the farmers joined the livestock focus group (Sukchan, 2005). These two results showed that many farmers saw expansion of livestock as the entry point into integrated farming. Income from increased livestock production can enable the farmer to accumulate additional capital for expansion into fruits and vegetables.

Figure 1. Metamodel of farmer orientations leading to diversification.


56

The second model for farmers with a vegetable/fruit orientation proceeds on a plot-by-plot basis to determine which plots could be used for vegetables. It has seven classes, divided into three types: 1. the agents: farmers 2. five objects, on which the agents act or from which the agents receive information and

outputs: plot, crop, pond, cattle, and market. 3. the clock, which includes time as seasons and periods and rainfall. The decision tree for the second model consists of nine submodels, five for the wet season and four for the dry season. The wet season decision tree proceeds as follows: 1. Plot use decision The objects in this submodel are three kinds of plots: lower paddy (LP), upper paddy (UP), and upland (U) (fig. 2). Farmers decide on plot use based on toposequence and pond proximity. If the plot is LP and not high in the toposequence, farmers will plant rice; if it is high in the toposequence, they will plant sugarcane. If the plot is U and near a pond, farmers will consider diversification, but if the plot is far from the pond, they will plant sugarcane. If the plot is LP, they will also consider diversification.

Figure 2. Plot use decision submodel for wet season diversification.

2. Diversification decision The objects in this submodel are the plot selected for diversification in the previous step, the pond, and the market (fig. 3). Farmers make decisions to diversify into vegetables or not based


57

sugarcane price, base pond water need, and household funds for investment. If sugarcane price is above 500 bahts, farmers will plant sugarcane and not diversify. If sugarcane price is below this threshold, they will assess the quantity of base pond water need, calculating the quantity of water needed for rice (seedbed, transplanting, emergency irrigation in dry spells) and livestock. If the pond has more water than the base pond water need, they will decide to diversify. If base pond water is inadequate, farmers will assess household funds available for investment to increase available pond water. If household funds are adequate, they will invest in water availability technology. If funds are inadequate, they will plant sugarcane in U plots and rice in UP if early rainfall is adequate, or leave the plot as fallow for cattle pasture if early rainfall is inadequate. 3) Water technology decision The pond is the object of this submodel. Farmers choose based on preference between: -- investment in the pond (build a new pond or enlarge an existing pond) -- investment in groundwater (dig a deep well to add groundwater to pond rainwater).

Figure 3. Decision submodel for diversification.


58

4) Vegetable crop decision The objects in this submodel are the market, the plot, and crops (fig. 4). Farmers make decisions among three wet season crops based price, plot type, and rainfall. If tomato price exceeded 30 bahts / kg in the previous year’s wet season, farmers will plant tomato; otherwise, they will plant pakchi (coriander) and onion. If pakchi and onion prices exceeded 10 bahts / kg in the previous year’s wet season, they will plant these crops. In either case, they will also make a decision about wet season vegetable technology. If all prices are below the above thresholds, they will assess plot type and rainfall to decide among other crops. In upland fields, they will plant sugarcane. In upper paddy fields, if early rain is adequate, they will plant rice. If early rain is inadequate for rice, they will leave the plot fallow for cattle pasture. 5) Vegetable technology decision The plot chosen for wet season vegetables is the object of this submodel. If farmers have adequate household funds to invest in a nethouse, they will build a nethouse. Otherwise, they will grow the crop without a nethouse.

Figure 4. Vegetable crop decision sub-model.


59

Conclusions and Next Steps The two models have been developed as initial companion models in on-farm research. They have helped us identify key variables to monitor with farmers. The next steps in the process of building a more complete MAS model will be to verify and expand these two models. In particular, we need to obtain more information to include other vegetables, especially pepper, and labor and land factors. Then we will select a group of farmers selected from the three experimental groups, livestock, vegetables, and integrated farming. The experimental results from the three groups will be presented first. Then, each farmer will be given land in a mini-watershed in which hydrology effects have been modeled (Suzuki et al., 2005). Farmers will be given different areas of the three types of fields, numbers and sizes of ponds, and numbers of cattle, representing the range among the farms in the village. The game will be played over five years, the time span used in the 2003 goal-setting exercise. Rainfall will vary each year, and yield and prices will be based on data acquired from the on-farm trials. Acknowledgement We thank the Rainfed Agriculture Project of JIRCAS for financial support, and many farmer and researcher collaborators who contributed to this work. References Ando, M. 2003. Potential and constraints for intensive land use with pond irrigation in Northeast

Thailand. Paper presented in International Symposium, “Alternate Approaches to Enhancing Small-scale Livelihoods and Natural Resources Management in Marginal Areas,” 29-30 October 2003, United Nations University, Tokyo, Japan.

Ashby, J.A., Braun, A., Garcia, T., Guerrero, M.P., Quiros, C.A., and Roa, J.I. 2002. Investing in Farmer Researchers: Experience in Latin America. CIAT, Cali, Columbia.

Lacombe, G.. 2003. Compréhension des strategies d’adaptation à la varibilité des pluies en riziculture inondée par la modélisation. Mémoire de DEA. Université de Montpellier II, France; CIRAD / IRRI, Bangkok; et Université d’Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand.

Le Page, C., and P. Bommel. 2005. A methodology for building agent-based simulations of common-pool resources management: from a conceptual model designed with UML to its implementation in CORMAS. In F. Bousquet, G. Trébuil, and B. Hardy (eds.), Companion Modeling and Multi-Agent Systems for Integrated Natural Resource Management in Asia, IRRI, Manila, Philippines (in press).

Limpinantana, V. 2001. Physical factors related to agricultural potential and limitations in Northeast Thailand. Pp. 3-18 in S.P. Kam et al., Natural Resource Management Issues in the Korat Basin of Northeast Thailand, IRRI, Manila, Philippines.

Sukchan, U., Caldwell, J.S., N. Suphanchaimat, I. Phaowphaisal, S. Sukchan, M. Oda, and Prasop Verakornphanich. 2005. Forming a farmer experimental group to develop technology for integrated farming in Northeast Thailand. IFSA Global Learning Opportunity Symposium, Rome, Italy (forthcoming).

Suzuki, K., Yamamoto, Y. and Sukchan, S. 2005. Hydrological modeling in small watersheds. Pp. 17-23 in: M. Oda, O. Ito, and J. Caldwell (eds.), Increasing Economic Options in


60

Rainfed Agriculture in Indochina through Efficient Use of Water Resources, Khon Kaen, Thailand

Yuvaniyama, A. 2001. Management of problem soils in the northeast of Thailand. Pp. 147-156 in S.P. Kam et al., Natural Resource Management Issues in the Korat Basin of Northeast Thailand. IRRI, Manila, Philippines.


61

Small Livestock for Landless and Small Farmers: Improving Farmers’ Lives through Improved Goat Production Practices in India

Mahesh Chander and H.P.S.Arya

Indian Veterinary Research Institute

Abstract India owns 20% (124.35 million) of world’s goat population, reared largely by landless and small farmers, especially women find goats more handy compared to large ruminants. Yet, goat production has remained largely a fringe activity done in casual manner leading to under harnessing of huge potential. Thus, some extension education interventions like organizing visits of farmers to goat research institute, showing films on improved animal husbandry, distribution of extension education literature on improved goat production and interactive sessions of goat farmers with scientists in six villages were attempted, leading to a positive impact on the farmers. These interventions were followed by donating pedigreed breedable bucks of barbari breed suitable for local conditions to be maintained on community basis. This experience indicated that goats offer a strong opportunity to development agencies for improving the life of farmers through suitable interventions viz. micro credit, extension education, technical and marketing support especially to women, landless and small farmers under different geographical, agroclimatic and socio-economic situations.

Introduction

India owns one of the largest livestock (485 million) and poultry population (489 million) in the world but with very poor productivity of these huge livestock resources (Table1). Yet livestock is an important source of supplementary income for over 70 million rural households in India, where, income from livestock accounts for about 15-40 per cent of total farm income of the rural households. The contribution of livestock sector to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in India has increased from 4.8 per cent in 1980 to 6.3 percent in 2001 though overall share of agriculture sector has declined from 35 per cent to 25 per cent in the above period. The dependence of small-scale farmers and landless agricultural laborers is more on livestock in comparison to large farmers; thus, this group of farmers owns most of livestock in India whose livelihood rest upon livestock. The livelihood prospects and socio-economic situation of small farmers can be substantially improved if the low productivity of livestock in India is improved through suitable interventions since currently it is much below the world averages indicating scope for further improvement. Among all livestock species, 20% (124.35 million) of world’s goat population is prominently reared by landless and small farmers of India, who for variety of reasons find it difficult to maintain large ruminants. As compared to men, women find goats more handy and beneficial to them since men mainly focus on large animals. Goats are one of the main meat animals in India contributing more than 10 percent of the meat production. Goat meat is one of the most expensive meats in India and is acceptable to people of all castes, creed and religion. As such,


62

goat offers vast potential for improving the national economy and human nutrition through export of goat meat and other products like leather etc and increased domestic availability of meat. Yet, goat production has remained a fringe activity done in casual and unscientific ways leading to under harnessing of huge potential.

Table1: Livestock population in India

Livestock Population Breeds

Cattle 185.18 million India is number one in terms of cattle population. Also, it is number one milk producer in the world with annual milk production of over 88 million tons. Most of this milk is produced by small scale farmers of India.

Buffaloes 97.92 million India ranks number one in buffalo population having more than 66 per cent of world population. Small scale farmers mostly raise livestock including buffaloes.

Sheep 61.46 million 5% of world population. Sheep farmers are concentrated in deserts, mountainous regions, where their dependence on sheep for livelihood is very high.

Goats 124.35 million 20% of world population and 20 per cent of biodiversity in India. Twenty-one recognized breeds. Provides for 37 per cent of meat consumption. Leather or hide is in high demand. Called a “poor man’s cow”, goat milk was Gandhi’s favorite. Animal is easy to rear and maintain as versatile and adaptable. Small and marginal farmers and landless agricultural laborers have high dependence on goats for their cash needs.

Poultry 489 million Backyard poultry is especially suited to small farmers

Therefore, goats offer a strong opportunity to development agencies for suitable interventions including micro credit, extension education, technical and marketing support especially to women, landless and small farmers (Chander et al, 2000; Arya & Chander, 2001; Arya & Chander, 2003, Kumar and Pant, 2003). Goat has been criticized quite often by environmentalists who claim that it degrades the environment. There is however, no conclusive evidence to this notion and on the contrary, it has been considered by many as non-detrimental animal as compared to men as far as environmental safety is concerned (Kumar and Pant, 2003; Kumar & Chander, 2004).

Methodology

The constraints in goat production were identified and opportunities were explored through household surveys of livestock owning families (1071) and families not owning any livestock (650) in six selected villages in North Indian state of Uttar Pradesh (Latitudes 28.100E &28.500N & Longitudes 78.580E & 79.470E). Besides, focus group interviews and other diagnostic Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools were used to document the goat production scenario in the selected villages. The extension strategies were developed and field tested to promote goat husbandry on scientific and improved lines through need based interventions. Impact study was also carried out to see the impact of these interventions directed to improve the animal husbandry


63

scenario in general and goat production in particular. The Impact study on interventions made by the Indian Veterinary Research Institute (IVRI) over the years was undertaken in 12 villages (6adopted, 6-Non adopted) to assess the impact of interventions against selected impact indicators on goat production activities in Bareilly district. 120 farmers (60 farmers from adopted villages and 60 farmers from non-adopted villages) were selected randomly for this purpose. As such, the study used surveys, PRA, action research and impact study to assess the potential and importance of goat production for small scale farmers and women in particular.

Results and Discussion The household surveys revealed that it was the most socio-economically weaker sections of society usually having no land or having less than 1 ha of land were rearing goats. The goat production activities were being undertaken on unscientific lines in casual manner since the farmers had maintained non descript goats with very poor feeding, improper housing and inadequate health attention. Thus, extension education interventions were urgently required to improve the goat production scenario. Accordingly, some extension education interventions like organizing visits of farmers to goat research institute, distribution of extension education literature on improved goat production, interactive sessions of goat farmers with scientists, and donating pedigreed breedable bucks of barbari breed to villages were attempted. Two groups of 13& 15 farmers each were taken to Central Institute of Research on Goats to show them different high potential goat breeds and scientific ways of maintaining these goats. For these farmers, it was first ever experience to see large sized goats, meat purpose, milk purpose and dual purpose breeds of goat. Also, they found that milk and meat is no end to goat products but a variety of other products can be made out of goats including products like cheese, which they had opportunity to taste at that institute. The literature distributed, interactive sessions with the scientists, expert lectures, film shows organized as a part of extension strategy had a positive impact on the farmers as many of their queries and worries were solved. Once they were exposed to the modern methods of goat production management, they were given two bucks of an improved breed suitable for local conditions and the requirement of the farmers. The farmers on community basis maintained these bucks so as to improve genetic potential of the local breeds. Many more similar interventions were envisaged to improve the returns from small scale goat farming done by landless and small farmers. The farmers find such interventions very satisfying, need based, thus, cooperate with the project team and also benefit from the interventions. Such micro-level interventions, therefore, are needed in different agro-climatic zones of the country as also in other similar regions of developing countries for improvement in production scenario. The impact study (1999-2004) revealed that, as compared to non-adopted villages, in adopted villages-

• Goat population had increased since 1999

• Communities traditionally not keeping goats had started rearing goats


64

• Local non descript goats were being replaced by high potential breeds though the rate of change was very slow

• Goats were being brought increasingly to vet hospital and animal health camps for health problems

• Feeding of goats had improved as grains were being included in the goat ration

• Women were increasingly involved with goat husbandry including sale and purchase of goats. This trend is on the increase across all over India.

• Farmers showed willingness to take loan from banks for the purchase of goats. Conclusion It is well established fact that goat is highly profitable species, easy to rear and maintain in terms of feeding and housing, thus, worth paying attention for harnessing its full potential especially in context of India. The goat meat has very high demand in India and its per capita availability is far below its requirement indicating potential for further increase in goat population and productivity. Given its importance to small scale farmers and women in particular, suitable interventions are needed as per the requirement of local conditions in different regions across the world. The small Indian experience discussed in the current paper may be indicative of the type of interventions required to improve the goat production scenario. In case of India, the livelihood of landless and small scale farmers is heavily dependent on goat husbandry, so it is particularly imperative that production practices of these vulnerable sections with limited options are transformed on scientific lines through appropriate location specific interventions. It is concluded that many more micro level interventions including action research projects are needed to assess the goat production practices in different regions so as to improve the profitability of goat production enterprise. References Arya, H.P.S. & Chander, Mahesh, 2001, Marketing of goats by rural women: some observations

in rural markets of Bareilly district, Proc. International Conference on Small holder livestock production in developing countries, November 24-27, Thrissur, Kerala, India, p.178.

Arya, H.P.S. & Chander, Mahesh,2002, Goat production by landless and small scale farmers in North Indian plains, In: Proc.17th Symposium of the International Farming Systems Association, 17-20 November, Florida (http://conference.ifas.ufl.edu/ifsa/papers/a/a10.doc)

Chander, Mahesh; Kumar, S; Harbola, P.C., 2000, Dynamics of goat husbandry in Indian Himalyan region, In: Proc. 7th International Conference on goats, France, 15-21, pp 334-336.

Kumar, S and Pant, K.P., 2003, Development perspective of goat rearing in India: Status, issues and strategies, Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 58, 4, 753-767.

Kumar, Sanjay & Chander, Mahesh, 2004, Is goat farming a threat to Ecology? ENVIS Bulletin: Himalayan Ecology, 12, 2, pp.13-16.


65

Land Degradation in Ethiopian Highlands: Major Causes, Development Attempts and Future Deliberations

Getinet Desalegn and Tilahun Amede

BOKU-University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Austria,

and African Highlands Initiative, Ethiopia

Abstract Ethiopia is facing challenges to properly manage and utilize its natural resources and improve the livelihood of its citizens. Rural poverty is considered to be both an agent and a consequence of environmental degradation in the country. Although different strategies are needed for different situations, the Ethiopian government opted for agriculture-based industralization as a long term strategy. In this case, there is a need to improve agricultural productivity through increased investments in capacity building, infrastructure, agricultural research and extension and market linkages. By investing wisely in combating land degradation and sustainable management of land, water and forest resources accompanied by creating sustainable market and policy option there is a waiting opportunity to pull the rural poor out of recurrent famine and poverty. This review indicates the challenges and the opportunities in reversing resource degradation in general and land degradation in particular using traditional and improved technologies and approaches. It is to provide an overview of past development attempts and suggest gap-filling ideas for managing land water and forest resources.

Introduction Ethiopia is one of the five world most impoverished nations, with annual per-capita income of US$100. The country has 72 million populations, of which nearly 43 % are illiterate. Agriculture has been a failure for so many years in Ethiopia to feed its population. It was only 40 years ago, Ethiopia exported an average of 90,000 tons of grains and legumes to its East African and Arabian Peninsula neighbours annually (Hailu, 1991). It is overlaid by a wide variety of soil types at a range of altitudes that proved a suitable environment for several crops and animals. In fact, only possession of good land and natural resources has little relation to development. Yet, lacking serious natural resources impediments, The agricultural potential has been threatened by soil erosion and deforestation, which are taking place at a rapid pace, affecting the country’s biodiversity (flora and fauna) and deepen poverty (EC, 2001). In the Ethiopian highlands, the average rate of soil erosion on cultivated land has been estimated to be more than 40 ton ha-1 year-1 (Hurni, 1988), which may have been the major cause for an average rates of nutrient losses of about 660 kg ha-1 of nitrogen, 75 kg ha-1 of phosphorus and 450 kg ha-1 of potassium per year (Smaling et al., 1997). Unless urgent measures were taken to arrest the serious land, water and forest resources degradation the country would be heading for a ”catastrophic situation”. The main aim of this review work is to provide an overview of past development attempts and suggest gap-filling ideas for managing land water and forest resources.


66

Status of Land, Water and Forest Resources Land Resource Close to 66% of the total land area of 112 million hectares is potentially suitable for agriculture in Ethiopia. Of which only 14% is currently under cultivation and over 50% is for livestock grazing. The rates of soil erosion documented in Ethiopia range from 16–300 tons ha-1 year-1

(FAO, 1984; Hurni, 1988). As suggested by FAO (1984) about 7,800 million tons of soil year-1

moved from the cultivated and grazing lands of Ethiopia. Water Resources Ethiopia is considered as the “water tower” of Africa, with 12 major transboundary river/drainage basins. The total annual runoff from these basins is estimated at about 111 billion cubic meters. There are also eleven major lakes with a total area of 750,000 ha. The major rivers carry water and valuable soil and drain mainly to neighbouring countries. The Wabi Shebelle and Genale drain through the desert areas of Somalia and flow into the Indian Ocean. Abay (Blue Nile), Tekeze-Angereb (Atbara) and Baro drain to the Sudan (and Egypt) and join the Mediterranean Sea through the Nile. The ground water and the gross Hydro-Electric potential in the country are estimated at 2.6 billion cubic metres and 139,250 Gigawatt hours (GWh) year-1, respectively. Based on available information the potential irrigable land in the country is about 3.7 million ha. Despite this huge potential of fresh water resources, the potentials in irrigation and hydropower are hardly exploited. Particularly the lowlands (<1500 m.a.s.l) have very high potential for the development of irrigated agriculture if water resources are developed and infrastructure is improved. Forest Resource The current rate of deforestation is estimated at 150,000 ha year-1 (EFAP, 1994) or 62,000 ha year-1 (EPA, 1997; IUCN, 1990; World Bank, 2001). Berry (2003) indicated that forests in general have shrunk from covering about 65% of the country and 90% of the highlands to 2.2% and 5.6% respectively (Table 1).

Table 1. Forest reduction Original

Extent of Forest 1950’s 1990 2000

Ethiopia total 65% 16% 2.7% 2.2%

Highlands only 90% 20% ?% 5.6%

Source: Berry, 2003

Causes of Resource Degradation The main causes of resources degradation in Ethiopia are considered to be poverty, lack of alternative energy, conflicts, institutional failures, population growth, inappropriate land use, deforestation, overgrazing, land ownership and property right, droughts and floods (Table 2). All


67

the forgoing factors often interact with one another and resulting decline of crop and livestock productivity, food insecurity, famine and environmental degradation. Table 2. Possible causes and effects of selected socio-economic and policy factors on resource

degradation. Causes Short term effects Long term consequences

Poverty - Limited investment on inputs - Over-exploitation of resources - Land fragmentation - Reduced investment on land management

- Low labor productivity - Lack of risk management options during

the time of drought, famine and floods - Inequitable share and distribution of

resources and services - Hunger, illiteracy, diseases, conflicts - Deprivation of basic needs (food, shelter,

cloth)

Energy crises - Over cutting of trees - Burning dung for cooking - Overuse of biomass

- Interruption of nutrient cycling

- Drought - Erosion

Conflicts / or Instability

- Community / state forest become vulnerable for deforestation

- Increase tree cuttings for charcoal and timber - Disappearance of check points for wood and

charcoal

- Mismanagement and overexploitation of resources

- Deforestation

Institutional and policy failures

- Overlapping of responsibility and mandates - Shortage resources ( resources wasting) - Integration and coordination problem - Lack of a common forum

- Mismanagement and overexploitation of resources

- Deforestation

- Drought

Land ownership & resource right

- Create uncertainties to farmers and rural communities

- Discourage investment (soil fertility, planting trees & building physical structure to stop soil erosion)

Deforestation - Forest land converted into cultivation, grazing, resettlement, investments

- Drought - Soil erosion

- Energy crisis

Attempts Made to Reverse Resource Degradation The 1974/75 famine was the turning point in Ethiopian history in terms of establishing a linkage between degradation of natural resources and famine. Since then the Ethiopian Government supported by various donors, international agencies and NGOs has made large-scale investment on soil conservation and land rehabilitation measures. However, there is very limited adoption of soil and water conservation and organic fertility enhancement practices, which was related to limited short term impacts on production, high labour cost of these practices and land scarcity

due to increased population pressure. There are major achievements in natural resources management, particularly in capacity building of institutional organisation, human and physical resources developments. The following physical and biological conservation measures were carried out (Table 3) and planned in the last five-year plan (Table 4) to combat land degradation.


68

Table 3. Soil and water conservation (SWC) measures carried out between 1976 and 1992 on

farmers’ fields. Type of SWC measures Area covered % total

Soil and stone bunds 78,000 ha 4.3 Hillside terraces and afforestation 253,000 ha 14.0 Bench terraces 580,000 ha 32.2 Clock dams in gullied lands 15,400 ha 0.9 Closed areas for natural regeneration (area enclosure) 410,000 ha 22.8 Afforestation 465,000 ha 25.8

Total 1,801,400 ha Sources: Hawando, 1995; Aragaye Berhe, 1996; EFAP, 1994

Table 4. National target for various soil and water conservation measures in rain deficit areas in

eight different regions (2000-2004) on farmers’ fields. Type of SWC measures Target % targeted

SWC (terracing, moisture, conservation, etc.) 500,000 ha 19.9

Ridge and furrow 250,000 ha 10.0 Contour ploughing 1,500,000 ha 59.8 Mulching 13,600 ha 0.5 Mulching 50,000 ha 2.0 Trash lines 87,000 ha 3.5 Trash lines 40,000 ha 1.6 Inter-cropping 36,900 ha 1.5 Runoff farming 17,500 ha 0.7 Flood diversion 12,000 ha 0.5

Total 2,507,000 ha Roof water harvesting 1,300 (number) 48.1 Farmer field harvesting 1,400 (number) 51.9

Total 2,700 (number)

Source: Natural Resources Management and Regulatory Department, MoA 2000. The document is written in Amharic.

Lessons Learned Matching Technologies Multiple natural resources management (NRM) interventions including the control of soil erosion towards the rehabilitation of degraded lands was started through food-for-work programme and was found to be successful in areas where there was sustainable technical backstopping and institutional commitment. In other interventions, e.g. rain water harvesting, the top-down approach that the government used to disseminate hindered adoption and implementation (Table 5).


69

Table 5. Lessons learned in technology matching in land and forest degradation and water harvesting activities in Ethiopia

Technologies Benefits Limitations / shortcomings Reducing soil

erosion

- Terraces , Check dams , Cut-off drains & micro-basins

- Afforestation & revegetation

- Restoring farmlands - Increasing soil depth - Increasing infiltration and water

holding capacity - Improved vegetative cover

- Labour intensive - Excluding indigenous

knowledge - Loss of farmland - Low adoption rate - No direct relationships with

food security and income of farmers

- Rain water harvesting

- Reduced distance and time on women and children in fetching water

- Expand agricultural, horticultural, livestock, chicken and bee keeping activities

- Enhanced intensification and NRM, particularly the homestead

- High cost (investment, maintenance and supervision)

- Occupies a large space in farmers fields A need to have a tin roof house

- As malaria breeding site

- Small scale irrigation

- Year round production - Simple management, operation and

maintenance

- Requires perennial source of water

- Require frequent maintenance - Labour intensive

Water

harvesting

- Tied ridges - In-situ water harvesting - highly time-consuming

- Afforstation - Reduce the fuel wood crisis - Reduce construction problems

- Limited choice of tree species for high altitudes

Combating

forest

degradation - On-farm tree growing

- Growing fruits and other trees around homestead

- Increased of vegetative cover - Reduce dung and crop residues for

energy & livestock feed - Improved income - Enhancing soil organic matter.

- Competing with cropland - Lack of property right and

incentives - Free grazing (seedlings

destroyed) - Competing for water and

nutrients

Policy and strategy issues While poverty and famine have continuously devastated Ethiopia, the country has responded by developing different poverty alleviation and reduction and environmental rehabilitation strategies. However these strategies did not reduce poverty as these policies consider implementation capacities and also did not emanate from careful analysis of realities and on the ground experiences. To mention few, the land tenure structure, institutional overlapping and conflicting responsibilities, in appropriate resettlement activities, lack of incentives and lack of income diversification in the rural areas are some of unresolved issues in the country (Table 6). For combating the natural resources degradation the direct (cash and kind) and inderect (fiscal, legislative measures and social services) incentives need to be provided in Ethiopia.


70

Table 6. Lessons learned in policy and strategy options for combating resource degradation

and water harvesting in Ethiopia Benefits Limitations /shortcomings Land tenure

- Promoting equity - Discouraged investment on soil and water conservation and afforstation

Incentives - Encouraged participation - Reduce burden on natural resource use

- Encouraged dependency - Encourage demolition of physical structures

and uprooting seedlings

Institutional organization

- Effective co-ordination and implementation of programmes

- Accountability for programmes

- Overlapping and conflicting responsibility - Resource competition and wastage - Missed priorities and development targets

Resettlement - Reduce population pressure - Efficient use of land resources

- Enhanced deforestation - Health problem of settlers

Income diversification

- Created alternative employment - Additional income generation

- Lack of enabling policy and infrastructure - Lack of stability and security

Future considerations Improving the natural resources base (land, water and forest) is central to any effort to arrest the ”cycle of poverty” (summarised in Table 7). Acknowledgements We are gratfully acknowledged the BOKU-Instute of Waste Mangement for financial and facilty supports. Special thanks are due to Kindu Mekonnen for his suggestions and comments on the preparation of the manuscript.


71

Table 7. Future considerations in combating land water and forest degradation in Ethiopia Causes / Failures

Recommendations to meet the respective objectives/aims

Measures to be taken

Participation - Enhancing enabling environment - Enhancing partnership - Devolution of power

- Awareness creation - Clear definition of partnership - Empower local governance

Property rights and incentives

- Ensure long term use of land, forest and water resources

- In place ownership policy - In place direct or indirect incentives

- Proper land use policy and legislation - Promote proper indigenous practices - Implement incentives according to the vulnerability of the

area and households

Land use system

- In place land suitability and capability policy - In place forest policy - In place water policy - Availability of modern know-how and

technology - Grazing management policy and legislation

- Appropriate policies and legislation on land use, forest, soil and water conservation and grazing management

- Educate the public - Implement population policy - Make available modern technology through research

Livestock population

- Balance livestock number to the available feed resources

- Improve the quality of livesocks not quantity

- Increase off-take rate - Change the management system from open to zero grazing

Population pressure

- Balance population growth to economic growth

- Family planning exercised - Women and man empowered - In place population policy - In place resettlement activities

- Proper implementation of the population policy (family planning)

- Alternative employment opportunity created - Proper resettlement should be implemented - Educate and empower women

Poverty

- Economic growth balanced to population growth

- Access to basic needs - Access to social services

- Integrate economic development with population controlled strategy

- Encourage labor intensive investment - Improve the quality of the population through education,

knowledge and skill

Institutional failures

- Stable with clear mandates and responsibility of institutions

- Allocate adequate resources - Clear mechanism of integration and

coordination - Established monitoring and evaluation (M&E)

- Establish institution with clear mandate and empowerment - Secure appropriate resources - Create a mechanism for institutional integration and

coordination - Established monitoring and evaluation (M&E)

Investment failures

- Proper environmental impact assessment (EIA)

- Labor intensive investment promoted in rural areas

- Commercial energy - Commercial agriculture - Income diversification in the non farm sector

- Educational, research and development institutes should be empowered

- Labor intensive investments should be encouraged - Ethiopia’s huge energy potential should be used (top

priority) - Ethiopia’s huge agricultural potential should be used (top

priority) - Create employment opportunity and reduce

Infrastructure and market failures

- Access to services - Access to markets

- Improve rural infrastructure and services - Promote appropriate energy saving technology - Develop alternative renewable energy system.

Conflict or instability

- Access to renewable resources - Equitable sharing and distribution to resources

and services - Unequal nature of adverse environmental

impacts and burdens

- Promote equitable share and distribution of resources and services

- Legal and institutional approach to prevent or prohibit conflicts

- Educational approaches, both formal and informal


72

References

Aregay Berhe. 1996. Twenty years of soil conservation in Ethiopia. A personal Overview. Regional Soil Conservation Unit, SIDA.

Berry, L. 2003. Land degradation in Ethiopia: Its extent and impact. Commissioned by the GM with WB support.

European Community (EC). 2001. Country Strategy Paper and Indicative Program for the Period 2002-2007, Brucels.

Ethiopian Forestry Action Program (EFAP).1994. The challenges for development, volume 2, Secretariat, Addis Ababa.

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). 1997. The Conservation Strategy of Ethiopia, volume 2, Addis Ababa.

FAO. 1984. Ethiopian Highlands Reclamation Study (EHRS). Final report, volumes 1-2, Rome. Hailu Gabtemariam. 1991. Wheat Research in Ethiopia: A Historical Perspective, in Hailu

Gabtemariam, D.G. Tanner, Mengistu Hulluka. (Eds). Addis Ababa: IAR/CIMMYT. Hawando, T. 1995. The survey of the soil and water resources of Ethiopia. UNU, Tokyo. Hurni, H. 1988. Degradation and conservation of the resources in the Ethiopian highlands.

Mountain Research and Development, volume 8, (2/3), 123-130. International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 1990. Ethiopian National

Conservation Strategy, volume 1. Addis Ababa. Smaling, E.M.A., Nandwa, S.M. and Janseen, B.H. 1997. Soil fertility in Africa is at Stake. In:

R.A. Buresh, P.A. Sanchez and F. Calhoun (Eds). Replenishing soil fertility in Africa. Madison, WI. USA. Soil Science Society of America.

World Bank. 2001. African development indicators. Washington.


73

Scaling Out Strategically: A Methodology for Understanding Patterns and Impacts of the Spontaneous Spread of Technological Innovations

Laura German1, Jeremias Mowo,2 Margaret Kingamkono3 and Jennifer Nuñez4

African Highlands Initiative Uganda, Mlingano Agricultural Research Institute Tanzania,

Selian Agricultural Research Institute Tanzania, University of Missouri, USA

Abstract: Agricultural researchers seeking to modernize smallholder farming systems through the generation and dissemination of agricultural technologies tend to measure impact through technologies developed and introduced into the supply chain. When impact is measured, it is often assessed through retrospective household surveys and standard correlational analyses of household and farming system variables influencing adoption. While systems approaches to agricultural research and development have enabled improved “fits” of technologies into complex farming systems, current attention to what happens to technologies after adaptive on-farm research trials is limited. Growing evidence of negative or imbalanced social and environmental impacts from technological interventions requires an expanded approach to technology tracking. This article summarizes a more encompassing methodology for tracking the fate of technological interventions, including the identification of pros, cons and major adoption barriers; social and biophysical “uptake niches;” farmer innovations; social networks through which technology flows in the absence of external mediation; and social and agroecosystem impacts of technology adoption. Findings illustrate the critical importance of tracking the fate of introduced technologies, and highlight potential applications of findings for enhancing the positive impact of agricultural research and extension in the region.

Introduction The primary emphasis of agricultural research and extension in eastern Africa is on technology generation and dissemination. Despite prior critiques of the shortcomings of the agricultural research and extension complex (deGrassi and Rosset, 2003; Havens and Finn, 1974; Hightower, 1972; Shiva, 1991), the consequences of technology dissemination are given limited attention. While farming systems approaches have enabled improved “fits” of technologies into complex farming systems (Eklund, 1983; Hagmann, 1999) and adoption studies have provided theoretical and methodological frameworks for understanding patterns and impacts of technology innovation (Rogers, 2003), attention to what happens following after adaptive on-farm research trials is often given only to numbers and characteristics of adopters (Nkonya et al., 1997; Wozniak, 1987). Impact is measured through the number of technologies developed and introduced into the supply chain, or at best through total numbers of adopters and the factors influencing adoption. Many factors influence the success and rates of technology adoption. These include farmer or household characteristics (wealth, age, gender, labor availability), farming system characteristics (land and livestock holdings, slope, access to irrigation), resource access (social networks, planting material, information), properties of the technology itself (how quickly it generates returns, required capital and labor investments) and farmer access to social networks (Adamo, 2001; Bunch, 1999; Negi, 1994; Perz, 2003; Shaxson and Bentley, 1991). If technological


74

innovation is seen as a one-off step (introducing new technologies) rather than a process that proceeds from problem definition to technology targeting, testing, monitoring, troubleshooting and dissemination/discontinuation, many of these patterns and lessons will be lost. Substantial risks may also be introduced into the system through a bias toward wealthier farmers (socio-economic gap-widening) or negative agroecological impacts. Technology ‘tracking’ or periodic monitoring is important for several reasons. First, blanket recommendations which fail to take into account household and farming system characteristics do not work (Chambers et al., 1987; Scoones and Thompson, 1994). This demonstrates the importance of understanding the specific social and farming system “niches” where technologies most easily fit. We define niche as the suite of social and farming system variables – including gender, household labor, resource endowments (land, irrigation, livestock) and the like – that facilitate or inhibit easy integration of an innovation into a farming system. Second, technology tracking enables the identification of major bottlenecks to technology access and adoption by different social groups. This knowledge is important for identifying specific interventions that would enable more widespread access to technologies among different social groups. Third, it enables the identification of farmer-led modifications of the technology (“re-invention”) – departures from recommended practice – that enable technologies to fit more easily into local farming systems (Bentley, 1990; Reij and Waters-Bayer, 2001). Fourth, such studies can increase the efficiency of research and development (R&D) interventions by identifying existing social networks that enable or hinder widespread access to benefits in the absence of extension agents or other outside mediators (Adamo, 2001). Finally, positive and negative impacts of technological innovation on livelihood, equity and the environment can be tracked (see de Grassi and Rosset, 2003; Haugerud and Collinson, 1990; Shiva, 1991), adding a much-needed ethical dimension to technological interventions (Cooley, 1995). This paper outlines a methodology for tracking the fate of technological interventions in agriculture. The methodology emphasizes technology “spillover” – spontaneous farmer-to-farmer spread of technologies in the absence of outside mediation – which gives greater insights into adoption and impact than research- or extension-mediated diffusion. Findings from the application of the methodology in two benchmark sites of the African Highlands Initiative, an ecoregional program of the CGIAR and ASARECA, are selectively presented to illustrate the methodology’s application in practice. Research Objectives and Questions Two objectives guided this research: 1) To gain insights into the spread and adoption of technologies that can be used to design strategies for scaling out; and 2) To document the positive and negative social, economic and environmental impacts of introduced technologies. The following research questions were designed to operationalize these objectives: 1. What are the pros and cons of each technology, and primary barriers to more widespread

adoption? 2. What were the social and farming system ‘uptake niches’ of different technologies? 3. What innovations & adaptations were made to introduced technologies? 4. What is the extent and social characteristics of technology spillover?


75

5. Did introduced or modified technologies have any impact on livelihood? 6. Did introduced or modified technologies have any impact on agroecosystem resilience? Methods The methodology follows four sequential steps. Step 1: Focus Group Discussions to Identify Basic Adoption Patterns. While personal experience and familiarity with the literature gives researchers knowledge of important factors influencing the adoption of technologies in their area of expertise, not all causal factors can be predicted by researchers given the specificity of local agroecological, cultural and socio-economic conditions. Interactions between farmer goals and decision-making, farming system characteristics and resource endowments, and properties of the technology itself are complex. This complexity limits the degree to which researchers themselves can identify all the relevant variables influencing adoption. It is essential, therefore, that surveys designed to track technologies begin with a broadly participatory assessment of patterns of uptake as observed by farmers themselves. This methodology uses focus group discussions with diverse groups (adopting and non-adopting farmers, primary and secondary adopters, or gender- and wealth-based groupings) for this purpose. Ideally, additional focus group discussions would be carried out until significant overlap is found in the patterns identified by farmers, and it can therefore be assumed that a comprehensive understanding of such patterns has been attained. Step 2: Tracking Surveys with On-Farm Interviews. Adoption variables identified by farmers in Step 1 are compiled and integrated with variables identified by researchers. Together, they form the basis of a “tracking survey” – household interviews to correlate the identified variables with adoption, and to systematically track the social and agroecological impacts identified by farmers in Step 1. This survey captures household and farming system characteristics of large numbers of adopters, a standard step in more econometric analyses. Since surveys require on-farm visits, they also provide a good opportunity for selective interviews to gather more qualitative data on technological innovation, livelihood and environmental impact, and the steps associated with technology adoption. Sampling procedures will depend on the ultimate objective. Random sampling techniques may be used if a rigorous econometric analysis of adoption variables is required. If the interest is to understand social networks through which technologies spread in the absence of outside interventions or how adoption levels and technologies themselves change through successive levels of ‘spillover’, a form of snowball sampling can be more useful. The latter is illustrated in Figure 1, where the “level of spillover” is defined as the distance (measured by the number of social transactions) the technology has spread from the original “host” farmer. Since technology adoption by farmers directly involved with project personnel may be biased by motives that are de-linked from the perceived benefits of the technology itself, it is important to designate such farmers as “L0” (level zero) – meaning that technology spillover has not yet occurred. Successive levels of spillover are therefore defined in relation to how many transactions the technology has passed through to be adopted. Farmers adopting from “project farmers” are designated “L1” or level one of spillover, those adopting from level one farmers “L2”, and so on.


76

Farmer Interacting Level 1 of Level 2 of with Technical Spillover Spillover L3, … Staff (L0) (L1) (L2) Spillover

Figure 1. Levels of Technology “Spillover” Relative to Project Interventions

Following these spillover pathways, a percentage of farmers at each level are interviewed to document household and farming system characteristics, the nature of social networks through which the technology was acquired, and with whom they in turn shared the technology (to compile a list of adopters at the next level of spillover). Tracking surveys should target not only adopting farmers, but also randomly selected non-adopters. This allows the emerging patterns (i.e. 80% of adopters have access to irrigation water year-round) to be compared with the demographic of the community at large (a “control group”). If 80% of the population at large has access to irrigation water, for example, then access to irrigation water is not likely to be a causal factor influencing uptake of that technology. Step 3: Data Analysis. The third step involves statistical analysis of data collected through the tracking surveys, and qualitative analysis of data from semi-structured interviews and farm visits. Basic patterns observed for each objective and research question are discerned at this time. Total numbers of adopters can only be assessed by extrapolating out from the percentage of farmers interviewed at each level.i Yet care must be taken in interpreting these numbers if farmers have not kept records on technology sharing from the start, as total numbers of adopters can be significantly underestimated. The data are nevertheless useful in understanding relative numbers, such as the percentage of exchanges characterized by kinship ties or the percentage of female adopters. Step 4: Focus Group Discussions to Interpret Emerging Findings. Step 3, data analysis and interpretation by researchers, is generally the final step of econometric analyses. However, in the absence of additional interpretations, a number of assumptions must be made about the reasons for observed patterns. An additional step of pattern interpretation by farmers can be useful for several reasons. First, patterns that would otherwise be difficult to observe are fed back to farmers, giving them a chance to contribute further in interpreting their own behavioural patterns. Second, it allows local logic (for example, why certain types of farmers are adopting a given technology) to be integrated with scientific logic in interpreting observed patterns, giving a more complete picture of farmer behaviour.


77

Each methodological step integrates several research questions, as illustrated in Table 1. Methods are matched to research questions on the basis of whether the question can be best answered through quantitative data, qualitative data or both. Table 1. Methods Utilized to Address each Research Question

Research Question Methods Pros and Cons of the Technology - Focus group discussions (pre).

Major Adoption Barriers - Focus group discussions (pre & post). - Tracking survey.

Social and Farming System Niches - Focus group discussions (pre & post). - Tracking survey. - Semi-structured interview. - Farm visits.

Farmer Innovations - Focus group discussions (pre). - Semi-structured interviews. - Farm visits.

Social Networks & Spread - Tracking survey. - Focus group discussions (post).

Livelihood Impacts - Focus group discussions (pre & post). - Semi-structured interviews. - Tracking survey.

Agroecosystem Impacts - Focus group discussions (pre & post). - Semi-structured interviews. - Tracking survey.

Results and Discussion Results have been selectively chosen to illustrate both the application of the methodology and key findings. Focus group discussions to identify basic adoption patterns Focus group discussions were used to identify basic patterns associated with each of the 6 research questions as observed by farmers. A sample protocol is provided in


78

a After hearing farmers’ responses, more direct questions can be asked targeting livelihood impacts (yield, income,

labor, food security, use of farm resources), community impacts (land distribution, conflict, tendency to cooperate, wealth distribution), and farming system impacts (weeds, disease, pest dynamics, soil fertility/moisture/erosion, and impacts on other on-farm activities).

Tracking spillover using “snowball” method The snowball method of sampling interviewees was used in the AHI studies due to the desire to understand who is sharing with who, as well as the rate at which technologies flow, in the absence of project intervention. The form in Table 2 was used to document Level 1 farmers receiving technologies from project farmers (Level 0), and to select Level 1 interviewees. Level 1 farmers indicated in bold font (20% of Level 1 adopters) were selected as interviewees for formal tracking surveys. This same form may be used to identify Level 2 farmers with whom Level 1 farmers have subsequently shared technologies.

Box 1. Sample Protocol for Focus Group Discussions

1. What are the technologies you have been exposed to or adopted in your farms? What do you like most

about each technology? What do you like least?

2. What were the primary factors hindering adoption by more farmers for technology x?

3. What are the most important resources required to adopt technology x (i.e. labor, land, nutrient resources,

capital, water)?

4. What types of farmers are most adopting technology x (by gender, age, wealth, farm characteristics, etc.)?

Why?

5. Among yourselves or other farmers you have observed, what have been the most useful changes made to the

technology after it as introduced? How was it changed and why?

6. Were there any social innovations that emerged to enable adoption or maximize benefits from the

technology, such as shared labor, organization to access inputs, or others?

7. Considering that people do not share technologies equally with all others, was there a tendency to share with

certain types of people? Who shares most with whom, and why?

8. Has the introduction or adoption of the technology had any impact on your livelihood or the community?a

Please mention both positive and negative impacts, if any.

9. Has the introduction or adoption of the technology had any impact on your farming system? Please mention

both positive and negative impacts, if any.


79

Table 2. Form for Tracking Technology Sharing (“spillover”) and Selecting Interviewees for

Formal Household Surveys Name of Level 0 Farmer No.

Name of Level 1 Farmer Sex Age

Relat- ionship

Village/Hamlet coming from

Tech nology taken

Exchange type

Shekigenda Abdalla 1 Incent Seng'enge M Y N Kwalei-Kamajia T S

2 Danieln Salehe M Y P Baga - wanga-Ukorogwe T S

3 Mnami M Md P Kwekitui -K.Mbogo T S

4 shabani Saidi M Y P Mamba - Mbelei B, T S

5 Abdi Omari M Y P Mamba - Mbelei B, T S

6 Hassani Seif M Old Fr Kwadoe - Maao T S

7 Ramadhani Athumani M Y R Kwalei – Muu T S

8 Mathias Bakari M Y P Kwalei - Kibaoni T S

9 Mwl. B.Mbwambo F Md N Kwakei - Kibaoni T S

10 Jumanne Hassani M Y R Kwalei - Shule T G

11 William Ezekieli M Y N Kwalei - Kamajia T E

Bakari Mshahara 25

Hassani B. Zuakuu M Y DiL Mgwashi B G

Integrating variables identified by researchers and farmers into formal tracking surveys Focus group discussions with AHI and non-AHI farmers pointed to several important variables influencing the adoption of technologies introduced by the project (Table 3). The following variables were identified as influencing adoption of soil conservation technologies, and integrated as new variables in the tracking survey (indicated in bold font in Tables 4 and 5): a) Limited access to technical assistance due to limited number of village paraprofessionals; b) Limited access to organic nutrient resources for the implementation of bench terraces, required to off-set the decline in soil fertility resulting from topsoil disturbance; c) Labor requirements, including numbers and age of household members; and d) Presence of permanent crops, hindering implementation of physical structures. In addition to these variables, scientists identified through their own experience a number of additional variables likely to influence the adoption of soil and water conservation technologies in particular (see grey font in Table 5). These included: a) soil quality prior to soil conservation, presumably influencing a farmer’s motivation for conserving his or her fields; b) access to irrigation water, assuming that farmers are more likely to invest in activities with longer-term returns in areas where cash crops are cultivated; and c) landscape position – including the proximity of conserved plots to households (influencing ability to transport manure to terraces and keep watch over cash crops) and water resources. Impacts stemming from the adoption of soil conservation practices were also identified through focus group discussions with adopting farmers and from researchers, and integrated into the tracking survey. Those identified by farmers include increased crop vigor, soil fertility and soil


80

water holding capacity (indicated in bold font in Table 5). Researchers then wanted to monitor the influence of these locally identified variables on related factors, including income (presumably enhanced through increased crop vigor and soil fertility) and incidence of weeds (presumably increased through soil fertility improvements) (indicated in grey font in Table 5). They also wished to know the total area under which the new technologies have been applied, as an additional indicator for measuring impact. A generic survey form integrating standard farming system and household variables likely to be important irrespective of the particular technology being tracked or other contextual factors related to location is shown in Table 4. Additional variables particular to soil conservation technologies and corresponding to farmer-identified adoption barriers (Tables 4 and 5) were added to the generic survey, adapting the tracking survey to local realities. Table 3. Adoption Barriers Identified through Focus Group Discussions in Lushoto Benchmark

Site (from German et al., in press) Technology Adoption Barriers Identified by Farmers

Banana Germplasm Low availability of planting material (suckers); susceptibility to drought.

Cabbage Germplasm

High cost of seed.

Organic nutrient resources

Limited knowledge on how to make compost; limited alternative uses of Mucuna; lack of compost materials; limited awareness.

Soil and Water Conservation

Presence of annual crops; labor requirements and old age; organic nutrient resource requirements; limited access to technical assistance.a

Tomato Germplasm Labor requirements; input requirements; limited access to irrigation & quality land; dislike of industrial pesticides; limited access to technical assistance (for agronomic practices).

a Tables 5 and 6 illustrate how locally-identified variables, such as these identified for soil and water conservation technologies, are integrated into formal tracking surveys.

Pros and Cons of Select Technologies In addition to identifying adoption barriers, focus group discussions enabled identification of pros and cons of each technology – information that might be used by research or extension to improve upon the technology or its delivery. Select pros and cons from Western Kenya are presented in Table 6. These can be used to modify the technologies (i.e. trait selection), aid in adapting the technology to local conditions (i.e. fostering collective action to minimize labor constraints or enhance input access), and to strategically disseminate complementary technologies that enable adoption (i.e. livestock with compost).


81

Table 4. Survey Instrument for Technology Tracking – Generic Entries (from German et al., in press, compressed for printing purposes, compressed for printing purposes)

a Bold font indicates farmer-identified variables. b N = Neighbor, Fr = Friend, R/E = Relative (extended family), R/N = Relative (nuclear family), O = Other. c I = Improved breeds, N = Non-improved or indigenous cattle.

Table 5. Supplementary Survey Instrument for Tracking Soil Conservation Technologies – Updated with Variables Identified by Farmers and Researchers (from German et al., in press, compressed for

printing purposes)

Farming System Characteristics

Impact (Positive, Negative, None)d Name of

Adopter

Techno-logy

Adopteda

(GS, BT, FJ)

Access to Technical Assistanc

e on SWC

Technols. (High, Med, Low)

Farm or

Landscape

Location of

Structuresb

(slope; HH or OF; IL

or NIL)c

Soil Quality Prior to Conservi

ng (Good,

Medium, Poor)

Access to

Irrigation

Water

Access to Organic Nutrient Resources (High,

Med, Low)

Land Area under Perenn

ial Crops

Soil Water Holdin

g Capaci

ty

Soil Fertil

ity

Weeds

Cro

p

Vig

or

In

come

a GS = Grass strips/fodder contours; BE = Bench terrace; FJ = Fanya Juu. b Bolded black font denotes variables identified by farmers, and bolded grey font those identified by researchers. c HH = near household; OF = in outfields; IL = irrigated land; NIL = non-irrigated land. d While not included here and saying little about social or environmental impacts, total length of conservation structures is also often used as an impact variable.

Household Characteristics

Other Technologies

Adopted

Name of

Adop-ter

Nature of Ex-change (Free, Sold,

Exch.)

Ex-change

d (Germplasm,

Assistance,

Working

Knowledge)

Age Gen-der

Spill-over Level

(L0, L1,

L2,)

Relationa

(N, Fr, R/E, R/N,

Other)

House-

hold Labor

Plots

Land

Acres

Land

Who Owns Land?

# Cattle (I/N)b

# Small Rumin

ants

Off-farm Income


82

Table 6. Advantages and Disadvantages of Select Technologies Introduced in W. Kenya Technology Advantages Disadvantages Kale - Income - Labor intensive - Early maturation - Risk (loss from theft, livestock) - Family nutrition, taste - Susceptibility to aphids, disease - Resistant to drought - High input requirements - Long life span - Requires pure stand - Frequent harvest - Market saturation Maize variety - Striga tolerance - Heavy feeder (high fertilizer requirement) - Higher yields - Poor germination - Cob form (resists rotting) - Short cobs - Early maturation - Theft - Seed may be re-used - Susceptible to disease - Taste - Can plant in both seasons Compost - Use of local materials - Limited dung / livestock - Soil improvements last - Time lag from preparation to use - Increases yield - Labor intensive - Makes soil easy to dig - Difficult to know when it is ready - Does not scorch seeds like inorganics

Social and farming system ‘uptake niches’ Focus group discussions and formal tracking surveys assist in identifying social and farming system niches of different technologies, the former to identify basic patterns of uptake (types of farming systems or households accessing the technology) and the latter to quantify these patterns. Results of the former from Lushoto site are summarized in Table 7. Biophysical and social innovations (“re-invention”) When carried out in W. Kenya site, multiple biophysical innovations were identified for each introduced technology. Those cited by farmers for Kale are illustrated in Table 8. During tracking surveys and on-farm interviews in Lushoto, Tanzania a number of social innovations were also identified that enabled technology adoption and improved livelihood. Table 7. Niche Breadth and Adoption Constraints in Lushoto Benchmark Site

Technology Adoption Constraints Niche Breadth Banana Germplasm & Management

- Lack of suckers - Susceptibility to drought

Broad – all farmers can readily adopt due to limited resource requirements.

Soil Conservation Measures

- Labor demands & age - Permanent crops - Availability of organic nutrient resources - Limited access to technical assistance

Medium – technology places substantial demands on labor and organic nutrients, but is not overly prohibitive as these are locally-available resources.

Tomato Germplasm & Management

- Spacing recommendations are time consuming - Harmful effects of industrial pesticides - Susceptibility to blight - Limited capital to purchase inputs - Requires quality land - Requires irrigation

Narrow – adoption highly dependent on favorable farming system characteristics (access to valley bottoms and irrigation), wealth (high input requirements), and labor.


83

Table 8. Biophysical Innovations in Kale in the Western Kenya Site Aspect Researcher recommendations Farmer innovations Fertilization FYM + Tithonia diversifolia, - Tithonia incorporation prior to planting direct application - Incorporation of Urea - Substitution of Tithonia with Canasis satiua

- Fermentation of Tithonia prior to use Spacing 60 x 45 cm - From 45 x 45 cm to 15 x 15 cm

For the implementation of bench terraces, one of the most common complaints was the high demand placed on household labor and organic nutrient resources (Table 7). Farmers in Kwalei village adapted the traditional labor-sharing practice of Ngemo to assist one another in the construction of bench terraces. Another important social innovation emerged from the introduction of a variety of tomato with high market value, coupled with optimal use of manure and urea. Youth with little access to land had made an agreement with an elder landowner with ample access to valley bottoms (ideal for tomato) but limited labor and organic nutrient resources. While the cost of inputs and all proceeds were shared equally, the labor-intensive work (including transporting farmyard manure and the preparation of stakes to support the tomato plants) is done by the youth. Such synergies were beneficial to all involved, complementing one another regarding their respective resource endowments (labor vs. land). However, transfer of a limited resource (organic nutrient resources) from some households and landscape niches also introduces a risk into the system by restricting use options of niches from which these resources were diverted. Given their role in enhancing adoption rates and associated benefits, both social and biophysical innovations should be properly understood by research and extension, and either validated by research or incorporated directly into dissemination efforts. Social networks Research on social networks incorporate a host of variables, including (minimally) characteristics of adopters (wealth, gender, etc.) and of exchanges. The latter includes the nature of the transaction (sold, given or exchanged), as well as patterns of technology sharing among the source farmers and new adopters. A small sampling of these findings is presented here. Gender patterns of exchanges for both sites are highlighted in Table 9. While an initial attempt was made by project personnel to enhance gender equity by working with equal numbers of men and women, inherent social dynamics caused male farmers to capture more of the benefits over time. Furthermore, since the percentage of source farmers that are female declines with successive levels of spillover due to gender biases at lower levels of spillover (only 22% of farmers are female by level 1 in Lushoto site), these differences are even more striking then they seem. For cash crops, exchanges with women were found to be negligible in Lushoto site, indicating that this bias has far-reaching implications for wealth equity. These data illustrate the need to understand how the social context conditions patterns of inclusion and exclusion resulting from introduced innovations, and the need to field-test new approaches for minimizing social biases in benefits capture.


84

Table 9. Gendered Patterns of Technology Sharing in Lushoto and W. Kenya Site Source Level 1 Adopters (%) Level 2 Adopters (%) Farmer Female Male Female Male Lushoto Female 50.0 50.0 60.6 39.4 Male 13.2 86.8 25.1 74.9 W. Kenya Female 66.3 33.7 55.6 44.4 Male 34.5 65.5 0.0 100.0

Data on types of exchanges in Lushoto site (Table 10) further reveal that most exchanges occur at no cost to adopting farmers. This represents a positive trend with regards to maximizing access by resource-poor farmers. However, while knowledge-intensive natural resource management technologies are never characterized by cash exchanges, 12% to 43% of exchanges of economically important crops are. This suggests that financial barriers may exist to technology access for those technologies that can make the most immediate livelihood impact. Table 10. Exchange Type for Different Technologies

Technology Exchange Characteristics Banana Germplasm & Management 88% given free of charge; the remaining 12% was sold.

Soil Conservation Measures 75% given free of charge; the remainder was exchanged.

Tomato Germplasm & Management 57% was given for free; the remaining 43% was sold.

Soil Fertility Management 67% was given for free; the remainder was exchanged.

Livelihood impacts Livelihood impacts were first identified through focus group discussions, with identified variables integrated into formal tracking surveys. Sample results from W. Kenya benchmark site are presented in Table 11, where the perceived impacts of Kale are presented.

Table 11: Livelihood Impacts of Kale in W. Kenya Site

Impact Household Labor

%

Food Security

%

Income %

Theft %

Employ- ment

%

Relation- ships

% Positive 0 100 100 0 82 82

Negative 73 0 0 55 0 18

None 36 0 0 45 18 0

It is clear from these data that technologies are not morally neutral (Cooley, 1995). Rather, they catalyze a host of social and biophysical impacts – some positive and some negative. This information can be used in the design of dissemination strategies that seek to maximize the positive and minimize the negative spin-offs. All too often, R&D actors treat such impacts as somebody else’s responsibility.


85

Agroecosystem impacts One aspect that is often overlooked in technology dissemination is the impact of a technology’s introduction on the agricultural system at large and the environment. A host of agroecosystem impacts were identified through focus group discussions in Lushoto Site, as summarized in Table 12. Agroecosystem impacts can also be quantified by integrating new variables associated with farmer-identified impacts into formal tracking surveys. Quantitative data on agroecosystem impacts of Kale introductions in W. Kenya are presented in Table 13. According to Nuñez (personal communication), due to the management, care and inputs required by kale, soil fertility generally increases on plots where kale is planted. This in turn helps produce higher yields of maize or beans when they are rotated to the former plot of kale. The use of mulch and farmyard manure is also seen by farmers as helping to retain moisture in the soil and prevent erosion. Weeding and planting methods, such as the use of contours, terraces or trenches, were also seen to prevent soil erosion and increase soil water holding capacity on some farms. Farmers also noted that rotations of kale and maize aids in pest control. Table 12. Agroecosystem Impacts Identified by Farmers in Lushoto Benchmark Site (from

German et al., in press) Type of Impact

Banana Soil and Water Conservation

Tomato

Impact on other system components

Favorable effects on other crops when intercropped.

Positive effect on banana (soil fertility and moisture) and livestock (fodder production).

Increased fallowing of hillside plots used for staple crops as more time is allocated to cash crop cultivation in valley bottoms.

Input requirements

Increased demand on fertilizer at farm level given high organic matter inputs during establishment.

No outside inputs identified. More pesticide and inorganic fertilizer use given crop demands and extended periods of cultivation.

Land, labor and nutrient allocations

Recommended spacing takes up more land; increased labor investments during planting and mulching.

Substantial diversions of organic nutrients and labor from other farm activities during terrace establishment.

Substantial diversions of land, labor and nutrients from coffee and maize.

Pests and disease

None observed. Reduction in maize stem borer.

Increase in pests and wilting disease due to decreased crop rotation and diversity.

Soil Mulching increases soil fertility and water holding capacity and reduces erosion.

Positive or negative impacts depending on levels of organic amendments.

Increased water holding capacity and fertility from manure usage.

Weeds Sharply reduced through mulching.

Increase in weeds near Napier grass.

Increased along with soil fertility.


86

Table 13. Agro-ecosystem Impacts of Kale

Nature of Impact Positive (%)

Negative (%)

No Impact (%)

Soil Fertility 91 0 9

Use of Fertilizers 11 78 11

Pests & Diseases 40 40 20

Use of Pesticides 18 55 27

Weeds 64 27 9

Soil Erosion 45 0 55

Soil Water-Holding Capacity 70 30 0

Impact on Other Crops/Activities 20 55 27

Deep digging and the constant weeding required by kale are seen to minimize the incidence of weeds. Striga also decreases as soil fertility increases. Another positive impact on other farm enterprises is the use of kale stalks to feed livestock. One interviewee noted a negative impact on other farm enterprises due to the labor required by kale, as less attention was given to his other crops. Summary This paper outlines a methodology for tracking the fate of technologies after introduced and in the absence of outside mediation. The paper illustrates some methodological tools for gathering data, as well as select findings from implementing the methodology in two sites in eastern Africa. Findings demonstrate the critical importance of tracking patterns of technology sharing and related impacts and adoption barriers, so that positive impacts can be enhanced while negative impacts minimized or managed through complementary interventions. It is argued that professionals in agricultural R&D are acting irresponsibly if the implications of their interventions are neither fully understood nor managed. This paper represents an attempt to move us in the right direction. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Department of Research and Development (DRD) in Tanzania; the African Highlands Initiative (in particular Dr. Ann Stroud); and our donors (the Rockefeller Foundation, SDC, the Netherlands and Norwegian governments, IDRC and DFID) for their financial support. We would also like to thank site team members of the Lushoto and Western Kenya benchmark sites and Chris Opondo for their conceptual contributions. References Adamo, A. (2001) Participatory agricultural research processes in eastern and central

Ethiopia: Using farmers’ social networks as entry points. CIAT Occasional Publications Series No. 33. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.

Bentley, J. (1990) Conocimiento y Experimentos Espontáneos de Campesinos Hondureños Sobre el Maíz Muerto. Manejo Integrado de Plagas 17:16-26.

Bunch, R. (1999) Reasons for non-adoption of soil conservation technologies and how to overcome them. Mountain Research and Development 19(3):213-220.

Chambers, R., Pacey, R.A. and Thrupp, L. (1987) Farmer first: Farmer innovation and agricultural research. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Cooley, M. (1995) The myth of the moral neutrality of technology. AI & Society 9:10-17.


87

deGrassi, A. and Rosset, P. (2003). A new green revolution for Africa? Myths and realities of agriculture, technology and development. Oakland, CA: Institute for Food and Development Policy.

Eklund, P. (1983) Technology development and adoption rates: Systems approach for agricultural research and extension. Food Policy (May 1983):141-153.

German, L., Mowo, J.G. and Kingamkono, M. (in press) A methodology for tracking the 'fate' of technological innovations in agriculture. Manuscript accepted in Agriculture and Human Values.

Hagmann, J. (1999) Learning together for change: Facilitating innovation in natural resource management through learning process approaches in rural livelihoods in Zimbabwe. Weikersheim, Germany: Margraf Verlag.

Haugerud, A. and Collinson, M. (1990) Plants, genes and people: Improving the relevance of plant breeding in Africa. Experimental Agriculture 26:341-362.

Havens, A.E. and Finn, W.L. (1974) Green revolution technology and community development: The limits of action programs. Economic Development and Cultural Change 23:469-481.

Hightower, J. (1972). Hard tomatoes, hard times: The failure of America’s land grant complex. Cambridge, Mass: Schenkman, 332 pp.

Negi, G.C.S. (1994) High yielding vs. traditional crop varieties: A socio-agronomic study in a Himalayan village in India. Mountain Research and Development 14(3):251-254.

Nkonya, E., Schroeder, T. and Norman, D. (1997) Factors affecting adoption of improved maize seed and fertilizer in northern Tanzania. Journal of Agricultural Economics 48:1-12.

Perz, S. (2003) Social determinants and land use correlates of agricultural technology adoption in a forest frontier: A case study in the Brazilian Amazon. Human Ecology 31(1):133-163.

Reij, C. and Waters-Bayer, A. (2001) Farmer innovation in Africa: A source of inspiration for agricultural development. London: Earthscan, 384 pp.

Rogers, E.M. (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed. New York: Free Press, 550 pp. Scoones, I. and Thompson, J. (eds.) (1994) Beyond farmer first: Rural people’s knowledge,

agricultural research and extension practice. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

Shaxson, L. and Bentley, J. (1991) Economic factors influencing the choice of pest control technology by small-scale Honduran farmers. Chatham, UK: Natural Resources Institute, 86 pp.

Shiva, V. (1991) The violence of the green revolution: Ecological degradation and political conflict in Punjab. Ecologist 21(2):57-60.

Wozniak, G. D. (1987) Human capital, information, and the early adoption of new technology. The Journal of Human Resources 22(1):101-112.


88

Production Potential of Spice Crops under different Farming Situations of Rice based Cropping System over Traditional Cropping System of

Chhattisgarh State of India

Rajendra Lakpale

Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, INDIA

Abstract The Chhattisgarh state of India inspite of its fertile soil, surplus manpower and favourable agro-ecological condition, is at the tail end of agricultural prosperity. Therefore, the situation calls for the use of dynamic and innovative approaches to get maximum productivity from every unit of land. At present, the cropping intensity of the state varies from 122-127 per cent, which needs to be increased upto 200 per cent by successful inclusion of seed spices, medicinal crops, oilseeds, pulses and commercial crops in the cropping system with rice as the base crop. Among the several alternatives, inclusion of spices like -coriander, fenugreek, black cumin, bishop's weed, cumin in rabi (winter) season will not only provide higher return but also earn foreign money. Rice ecosystem of Chhattisgarh can be divided into three major farming situations such as low-land, mid-land and up-land. In the present investigation, two farming situations of rice viz. mid-land and low-land were selected to evaluate the production potential of spices like-coriander, fenugreek and black cumin over traditionally grown crop chickpea during the rainy and winter season of year 2001 and 2002. The results revealed that, in general, the chickpea equivalent yield was found higher in mid-land situation than low-land situation. The fenugreek crop gave maximum chickpea equivalent yield among the crops. The remaining spice crops performed comparatively better in terms of chickpea equivalent yield under both the farming situation as compared to chickpea crop. Total net income of rice-spice cropping system was higher under mid-land farming situation than low-land farming situation. Among the crops, rice-fenugreek gave maximum net returns in both the cropping system followed by black cumin and coriander crop.

Introduction In the diversification era of agriculture of Chhattisgarh, growing of spice crops or inclusion of spice crops in the existing cropping system would be appropriate to boost up farmers income and fulfils the nation’s demand. In the state, 10-15 per cent of rice is grown in up-lands having lateritic to sandy loam soil type, while 20-30 per cent is cultivated in low-land situation having clayey soil type. Majority of rice area (55-70 %) comes under mid-land situation and here spice crops can successfully be taken after rice in rabi (winter) season. The spice crops can be grown after medium duration (120-125 days) and long duration (130 140 days) rice varieties. The present cropping system i.e. rice-chickpea or rice-linseed or other oilseeds and pulses unable to provide very good remuneration to the farmers. Whereas, under same management practices and inputs level some seed spices can be grown successfully to increase farmers income substantially after rice. Irrigation is the main constraints during rabi season to grow such type of crops under various rice based cropping system. Under such conditions, proper management of irrigation can pave the way for getting maximum production potential and income. Keeping the above facts in view a field experiment on irrigation management in spices grown under mid-land and low-land situations after rice was carried out.


89

Materials and Methods The experiment on spice crops was conducted during rabi (winter) seasons of 2001-02 and 2002-03 at Instructional Farm, IGAU, Raipur (CG) to investigate the effect of irrigation schedules on spice crops grown under mid-land and low-land situations after medium and late duration rice, respectively. The experiment comprising of six irrigation schedules viz. no irrigation, one irrigation at 35 DAS, two irrigations at 35 and 75 DAS, three irrigations at 35, 60 and 85 DAS, irrigation schedules at 0.6 IW/CPE and at 0.8 IW/CPE were tested on four crops viz.- coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.), black cumin (Nigella sativa), fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum) (check crop) during rabi after medium duration rice cv. ‘Mahamaya’ in mid-land situation and late duration rice cv. ‘Swarna’ in low-land situation following split-plot design with three replication. Irrigation schedules were taken in main-plot and crops were taken in sub-plot. The treatment - three irrigations at 35, 60 and 85 DAS was incorporated in the study during second year only. The soil of experimental site was Alfisols. The bulk density of soil was 1.44 Mg m3, permanent wilting point was 17.5 % and field capacity 27% (0-20 cm depth). Available nitrogen was low (198 kg/ha), phosphorus was medium (16.8 kg/ha) and potash was high (298 kg/ha) in the soil. In each irrigation 60 mm of water was applied. The IW/CPE was determined from daily pan evaporation data recorded at the meteorological observatory. Result and Discussion Chickpea equivalent yield Total productivity of rice- spice cropping system in terms of chickpea equivalent yield has been calculated under mid-land and low-land rice based cropping system and presented in Table 1. It was obvious from the data that both the cropping systems have influenced remarkably the chickpea equivalent yield of the rice- spice cropping system. In general, the chickpea equivalent yield was found higher in mid-land rice based spice cropping system in comparison to low-land rice. The fenugreek crop gave maximum chickpea equivalent yield among the crops. The remaining spice crop performed comparatively better in terms of chickpea equivalent yield under both the farming situation as compared to chickpea crop. The lowest chickpea equivalent yield was observed under no irrigation system, whereas, the maximum chickpea equivalent yield was recorded with irrigation schedule at 0.8 IW/CPE irrespective of crops under both the farming situation, except in case of chickpea in low-land rice-spice cropping system, in which, chickpea gave maximum yield under two irrigations at 35 and 75 DAS. Net income Although, the maximum net return from rice was recorded under the low-land rice than mid-land rice, but in term of total net income of system, it was obviously more under mid-land rice (Table 1). In general, total net income of system was higher under mid-land rice-spice cropping system than long duration rice-spice irrespective of crops. It was remarkable that irrigation schedule at 0.8 IW/CPE gave maximum net returns in all the crops, except chickpea crop followed by irrigation schedule at 0.6 IW/CPE. In case of chickpea, the maximum net income from the system was found in irrigation schedule of 0.6 IW/CPE under mid-land rice-spice cropping system and under two irrigations at 35, 60 and 85 DAS in low-land rice –spice cropping system. Among the crops, rice – fenugreek gave the maximum net return in both the farming situation followed by black cumin and fenugreek crop. The lowest net return incurred under rice- chickpea cropping system in both the farming situation.


90

In general, yield levels of all the tested crops were less under low-land situation than the mid-land situation due to late sowing of spice crops after the harvest of late duration rice cultivar ‘Swarna’. The sowing under this experiment took place during 2nd- 3rd week of December. The beneficial effect in coriander due to early sowing was reported by Ali et al. (1996), Sharma (1996) and Tancer et al. (1998). High yield of black cumin in normal sowing might be due to the favourable weather because delay in sowing coincided with higher temperature at maturity stage and caused forced maturity, resulting in shrinkled seed with lighter weight. The finding corroborates the result of Ahmed and Haque (1986). Climatic factors such as temperature, duration of bright sunshine and relative humidity differ with sowing time of the crop, which ultimately influences the growth and yield of the crops. Among these factors, the temperature is sensible; it influences morphology, development, production and occurrence of phenological phases. The higher temperature prevailed at vegetative growth and reproductive phase of crop under late sown condition suppressed the growth and development of crop. Poor development of the fenugreek crop resulted in less plant height and less number of branches in comparison to normal sown condition. This is in conformity with the results of Sheoran et al. (1999) and Sheoran et al. (2000). Concerning to mid-land and low-land rice-spice cropping system, irrigation schedules at 0.8 and 0.6 IW/CPE gave higher chickpea equivalent yield and net income from the rice-spice cropping system under both the farming situation. The productivity of mid-land rice-spice cropping system was higher than low-land rice-spice cropping system. Although, there was lower yield of rice in mid-land rice, but higher yield of spices compensated the loss of rice yield and gave higher productivity of the system. Whereas, under low-land rice, though the rice yield was higher than the mid-land rice, but owing to late sowing of spices, the productivity of spices affected adversely and resulted in less productivity and net income of the system (Table 4.1). Among the different rice- spice cropping system viz. rice- coriander, rice- black cumin, rice- fenugreek and rice- chickpea, the performance of rice- fenugreek cropping system was better giving maximum chickpea equivalent yield and net income under both farming situation followed by rice– black cumin and rice – coriander cropping system. Thus, inclusion of spice crops after rice proved superior to the traditional rice- chickpea crop sequence. Summary The total productivity in terms of chickpea equivalent yield and net income from the rice-spice cropping system was comparatively higher under mid-land situation than low land situation. Although, the rice productivity and net return were higher under low-land situation, but, productivity and net return were less with spice crops, ultimately resulting in less productivity and income from low-land rice spice cropping system. In general, irrigation schedule at 0.8 IW/CPE gave higher productivity and net return under both mid-land and low-land rice-spice cropping system. But, irrigation schedule at 0.8 IW/CPE with fenugreek grown after mid-land rice gave the highest productivity and net return in comparison to other irrigation schedules and spice crops under both mid-land and low-land rice-spice cropping system. In case of rice- chickpea cropping system, irrigation schedule at 0.6 IW/CPE performed better under mid-land rice- spice cropping system and with low-land rice, the highest productivity and net return were found under three irrigations at 35, 60 and 85 DAS.


91

References Ali, S.A., Tomar, R.K.S., Raghu, J.S. and Yadav, L.N. 1996. Research efforts for boosting

coriander production in Madhya Pradesh. Advances in Agricultural Research in India 5: 25-32.

Sharma, R.N. 1996. Effect of date of sowing and level of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth and seed yield of coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.). Bhartiya Krishi Anusandhan Patrika 11(4): 232-238.

Tancer, O., Tansi, S. and Kizil, S. 1998. The effect of different sowing time on essential oil of coriander in GAP region. Anadolu 8(2): 101-105.

Ahmed, N.U. and Haque, K.R.1986. Effect of row spacing and time of sowing on the yield of black cumin (Nigella sativa). Bangladesh Journal of Agriculture 11(1): Sheoran, R.S., Sharma, H.C. and Pannu, P.K. 1999. Efficiency of phosphorus fertilizer applied to fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) genotypes under different dates of sowing. Haryana Agricultural University Journal of Research 29(3-4): 101-107.

Sheoran, R.S., Sharma, H.C., Pannu, P.K. and Niwas, R. 2000. Influence of sowing time and phosphorus on phenology, thermal requirement and yield of fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum) genotypes. Journal of Spices and Aromatic Crops 9(1): 43-46.


92

Table 1. Comparison of productivity and economic advantages of medium duration rice-

spice and long duration rice-spice cropping system (Mean of 2 years data)

Medium land Situation

cv. Mahamaya

Low-land Situation

cv. Swarna

Treatment

Avg.

yield,

q ha-1

Net income,

Rs ha-1

Chickpea

equiv.

yield,

q ha-1

System net

Income,

Rs ha-1

Avg.

yield,

q ha-1

Net income,

Rs ha-1

Chickpea

equi.

yield,

q ha-1

System net

Income,

Rs ha-1

Rice

45.00

12,500

18.75

52.00

17820

21.67

Rice-Spice Cropping System

Coriander

I1 2.11 887 24.02 13,387 1.60 -686 25.67 17,134

I2 3.73 5,454 28.08 17,954 2.17 609 26.18 18,429

I3 5.64 10,885 32.84 23,385 3.13 3,174 29.58 20,994

I4 7.00 14,309 36.25 26,809 1.75 -1,824 26.05 15,996

I5 7.46 15,899 37.35 28,399 4.48 6,710 32.86 24,530

I6 8.27 17,733 39.41 30,233 4.84 7,146 33.76 24,966

Black cumin

I1 1.17 -738 23.65 11,762 0.92 -1,813 26.04 16,007

I2 2.26 4,679 28.19 17,179 1.45 504 27.71 18,324

I3 4.06 13,460 35.69 24,960 1.90 2,424 29.60 20,244

I4 5.62 20,616 42.15 33,116 2.68 5,633 32.85 23,453

I5 5.75 21,439 42.67 33,939 2.33 4,033 31.40 21,853

I6 6.09 22,592 44.12 35,092 3.04 6,965 34.74 24,785

Fenugreek

I1 4.00 5,051 27.08 17,551 2.42 888 26.70 18,708

I2 6.24 10,391 31.75 22,891 3.74 3,950 29.46 21,770

I3 9.25 17,668 38.01 30,168 5.22 7,329 32.54 25,149

I4 13.33 27,427 46.52 39,927 4.44 4,531 30.93 22,351

I5 13.62 28,328 47.13 40,828 7.29 12,051 36.86 29,871

I6 14.44 29,819 49.67 42,319 7.86 12,829 38.05 30,649

Chickpea

I1 8.12 3,172 26.87 15,672 7.38 2,266 29.04 20,086

I2 10.41 5,639 29.16 18,139 9.65 4,695 31.30 22,515

I3 13.95 9,218 32.70 21,718 10.86 5,777 32.53 23,597

I4 16.82 12,571 35.57 25,071 10.11 3,767 31.78 21,587

I5 18.01 14,148 35.83 26,648 11.38 5,607 30.49 23,427

I6 17.08 12,107 36.76 24,607 8.99 1,958 31.34 19,778

I1- No Irrigation, I2- One at 35 DAS, I3- Two at 35 & 75 DAS, I4- Three at 35, 60 & 85 DAS, I5- 0.6 IW/CPE, I6- 0.8 IW/CPE


93

Surprising new partnerships on our journey towards a sustainable rural area in Noord-Brabant

Rob Maessen and Geert Wilms

Administration of Noord Brabant

Introduction The abandonment of agricultural land is a threat for social cohesion, the economy and the cultural landscapes of Europe, even though its causes and manifestations may be quite different in different parts of Europe. In some places the necessary development of scale for agricultural production can be distinguished as the most important driving factor on the inside that forces competitors to look for other employment and sell their farms. In other areas it is the outside pressure of urbanisation and the craving for ever more land needed for new developments. Or again in different areas traditional farming practices may no longer provide enough income for a decent way of living. Whatever the reasons for the abandonment of agricultural land are, giving up farming has a tremendous effect on the life of the people, on the communities involved and on society in general. But change, however difficult it may be, also provides opportunities for change for the better and for a more sustainable development. Intensively used agricultural land may for instance be turned into extensively used agricultural land where an additional income can be made by delivering social services. Moreover, the current trend to change agricultural subsidies into payments for rural services is offering important opportunities, both, to contribute to sustainable development of rural areas in Europe and to make Europe’s payments to the agricultural sector more cost effective. Background The province of Noord-Brabant is one of the largest of the twelve provinces in the Netherlands. It is also one of the wealthier provinces with 15% of the Dutch GNP (54 billion euro in 2002) and it scores among the most innovative regions of Europe. Bordering Belgium in the South it covers 500,000 hectares of land. With 2.4 million inhabitants it belongs to the most densely populated areas of Europe. Noord-Brabant has an important urban cluster around the cities of Eindhoven, Helmond, ‘s-Hertogenbosch – Brabants capital – Tilburg and Breda, where 60 percent of the population is living. The other part of the population is traditionally quite evenly spread over the countryside living in smaller towns, villages and hamlets. The urban area provides 70 percent of the 1.1 million jobs and many people commute on a daily basis, contributing to the heavy traffic. Industry has developed into an important stronghold in Brabant hosting well-known companies like Philips, ASML, and Shell. But agriculture is also important and still produces 3 to 4 percent of the income in the region with over 14800 farms using about 50 percent (260,000 ha) of the available land and supported by a strong agro-industrial complex. Altogether this complex provides about 100,000 jobs, one of every ten in Noord-Brabant. More than half of the remaining surface (130,000 ha) is taken up by often small nature areas. A few stand out as conservation areas of international fame and beauty: the Biesbosch, the Peelvenen, and the Loonse en Drunense

Duinen. No wonder that Brabant is well known for its attractive and friendly countryside, where rural and urban influences are closely connected and easily mix. With valuable treasures and high environmental pressures Brabant has a longstanding interest in sustainable development, a testing ground for Europe.


94

Developments Agriculture has had an important socio-economic influence in the rural areas of Noord-Brabant and this influence will undoubtedly remain substantial in the future, even though the number of farms is decreasing. New social functions are to be fulfilled. Over the past few years the sector has been recognised as one of the most important stewards of our Brabant’s landscape. As this economic pillar will continue to play an important role the question is in what direction will development take place and whether this development of the agricultural sector can help to keep and restore a productive balance with social and ecological values? Table 1, 2 and 3 provide some figures.

Table 1: Company structure - Number of farms in Noord-Brabant ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1990 1996 2002 2003 2004 Arable farming 2.256 2.173 2.189 2.235 2.227 Horticulture 3.298 3.098 2.645 2.609 2.530 Cattle & dairy farms 8.474 7.682 6.305 6.087 5.977 Pigs and chicken 4.514 4.010 2.782 2.348 2.288 Others 3.313 2.640 1.967 1.857 1.778 Total 21.855 19.063 15.888 15.136 14.800

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- Source: CBS 2004. Note: The number of arable farms has remained on the same level wile the number of animal related farms has gone down. The swine fever in 1997 and the chicken fever in 2003 provide only a partial explanation for this phenomenon.


95

Table 2: Type of agricultural production in Noord-Brabant ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commercially cultivated land (ha) 1992 1997 2002 2003 2004 Grass land 120.712 111.036 102.248 98.749 98.966 Arable land 132.311 138.395 139.831 137.417 137.231 Potatoes 15.643 16.675 18.105 16.770 17.238 Maize 77.008 75.638 69.250 69.456 69.526 Corn 13.000 16.407 18.791 17.702 17.534 Sugar beets 14.159 14.216 13.532 12.839 12.002 Others 12.501 15.459 20.153 20.650 20.931 Horticulture

Outdoor crops 19.157 19.153 21.254 21.766 21.277 Tree nurseries 3.445 4.180 5.478 5.433 5.803 Glass crops 868 939 1.196 1.216 1.256

Total 273.844 271.283 266.138 260.332 259.788

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: CBS 2004. Note: There has been a strong decline of grass land of 18% over 12 year. Horticulture is becoming more intensive with an increase in the area for hothouses of 34% over the past 7 years. The sudden drop in 2004 of land cultivated for outdoor crops is remarkable and can be explained by a decline in area for vegetable crops by 824 hectare.

Table 3: Life stock in Noord-Brabant ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1992 1997 2002 2003 2004 Large animal units 1.727.963 1.666.846 1.340.920 1.251.869 1.244.584 (expressed by phosphate deposition) Cattle (total number) 961.654 817.845 657.222 638.870 643.463 Of which dairy related 294.441 259.073 214.920 213.585 213.265 Number of pigs 6.037.820 6.742.532 5.062.093 4.787.266 4.819.347

Number of chicken 30.245.149 26.459.613 28.371.249 22.893.788 23.634.172 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source: CBS 2004. Note: The steady decline visible until 2002 in the number of pigs and cattle seems to have stopped with numbers stabilizing over the past 3 years. The decrease in number of chicken in 2003 is a direct result of the chicken fever. The amount of phosphate washed out into the environment has gone down by 28% over the past 12 years.

The tables show a substantial increase in the horticulture sector, whereas dairy farming has decreased. The grassland area of Noord-Brabant decreased from 120,000 hectares to an area of less than 100, 000 hectares with the total number of cows dropping about 30 percent over a period of 10 years. In general it can be expected that income will continue to increase in the intensive production sectors in future. However, income in the ground-tide production sector will most likely decrease even further as a result of environmental regulations and market competition.


96

Table 4: Number of farms that have additional income generated from multi-functional

agriculture in Noord-Brabant. Source: CBS 2003

1999 2003 Nature management 637 1.122 Farm shops 981 1.410 Agro-tourism 393 328 Healthcare farms 43 54 In 1999 and in 2003 a survey was done about multi-functional farming in Noord-Brabant. The number of farms is increasing, but the additional income generated from these activities contributes only a few percent towards the annual income.

Tabel 5: Development of organically grown crops and number of organic farms in Brabant

and the Netherlands from 1999 – 2003 Source: CBS 2003

Noord-Brabant Netherlands Area (ha) Number of organic

farms Area (ha) Number of organic

farms 1999 1137 71 21.511 786 2003 2764 128 37.269 1185

Increase from 1999 - 2003

143% 80% 73% 51%

Organic farming is developing more rapidly in Noord-Brabant compared to the development in the Netherlands in general. The area used by individual organic farmers is getting larger.

The pattern that seems to be emerging indicates a characterization of agriculture practices in two dimensions. The first one is the Agro-food complex which emphasizes the need for sustainable production of food. Within this context agricultural and horticultural production sites are part of food production chains that may often spread all around the globe. The income generated will grow even though the number of farmers involved may actually decrease. Because of increasing global competition in these production chains there is need for products with more added value. The other dimension in the emerging pattern is the importance of agriculture for the sustainable management of an attractive regional countryside (table 4 and 5). More land becomes available that will allow for extensive kinds of agricultural production, helping to improve the quality of the landscape. The pressures on the natural environment and underground water resources in Noord-Brabant are high and more support is needed. However, looking at this second dimension from the perspective of the farmer’s income the figures are not yet impressive. There is clearly a need to improve the economic perspective of multi-functional agriculture. There will have to be a proper payment for the green and blue services provided. Finance mechanisms are not yet in place but are needed urgently to safeguard a sustainable future development. Practice The Steering Committee for Agricultural Innovation in Noord-Brabant is based on a long term agreement between the provincial government and the farmers association ZLTO (with around 15.000 members in Noord-Brabant, September first 2004) and in itself an example of fruitful cooperation. This Committee has been in support of projects that bring people together from various backgrounds to try out new developments. The often surprising partnerships that apply for support are first of all an indicator of the development that is taking place. Over the years it has also become a reservoir of cases of successful local development practice.


97

Below we present three examples of surprising new partnerships in the rural area of Noord-Brabant. Organic school milk distribution in Brabant Objective: to stimulate organic milk sales Partners: Brabant Federation for Environmental NGOs; Veco Dairy Products; organic

farmers; Farmers Union Providing organically produced milk to primary schools children allows for an easy introduction of environmental awareness programs and educational projects on organic farming. Experiences indicate that such educational advantages may become an important motive for school boards to switch over and start ordering organic milk for their school milk program. Furthermore, the successful introduction of organic milk at school stimulates parents to develop an interest in buying organic produce. The focus of this project is on promoting organic school milk with school boards, management, and parents, on providing educational activities with the help of organic diary farmers and on giving support and advice for purchasing organic milk. The marketing and production of “Farmers Fowl” Objective: to develop an animal-friendly brand Partners: chicken farmers; a feed production company; NGOs for animal protection and

consumer rights; local authorities in Noord-Brabant. Recent discussions in the Netherlands on the well-fare of chickens raised for meat production have focused on the time from hatching to slaughtering. While the tendency has been to stimulate rapid growth, the number of drop out chicks due to early death goes up as well. Research indicates that bringing production time down is not only appreciated from an animal well-fare point of view but may also result in better quality meat and potentially higher consumer prices paid. However, this “Farmers Fowl” needs to become a distinguishable label on supermarket shelves to make this possibility into a feasible development. is able to provide the necessary expertise and are making progress. De-phosphorization of nature areas Objective: to investigate possible mutual gains when converting arable land into nature

areas Partners: local farmers and local farmers association (Duinboeren); nature conservation

NGO (Natuurmonumenten); knowledge centre (Louis Bolk Instituut) The challenge is to enhance the de-phosphorization process in order to develop higher nature values more quickly, while still producing valuable yields to the farmer. Presently, farm land changes its function almost overnight – abandoned by the farmer and left to the forces of nature. However, this is not necessarily a successful approach. A number of grounds acquired by Natuurmonumenten near the National Parc Loonse and Drunense Duinen about 10 years ago still has not reach its destined nature values. The idea is now to grow grass and red and white clover. A maintenance programme of distributing kali and patent kali will enhance nitrogen intake of clover to get a good yield from the grass land. The grounds will be used again by local farmers and contribute towards more extensive farming practices. Regular mowing will cause additional de-phosphorization, thus creating better circumstances for nature development. The outcome after one year looks promising even though it has become clear that it will take several years to reach the goals that were set.


98

Conclusion The rapid and often devastating changes in Noord-Brabant and elsewhere in Europe effecting farming practices and rural communities can be seen as the result of knowledge development and specialisation that modern society requires. Our modern, technology based way of life demands an ever increasing amount of new specialists, more knowledgeable about smaller details. This strong centrifugal force has to be balanced by a cohesive force of equal impact. Cooperation and partnerships are therefore important instruments for innovation. While vertical associations are stimulated by production chain developments, horizontal or regionally based cooperation is most likely to drag behind as sectors of specialist develop that have more and more difficulty in understanding each other. Regional, cross-sector partnerships may therefore offer a great potential for innovative development and help to make use of the available opportunities that come with social change. These new types of relationships – or strategic partnerships – reflect a shift in attitude from trying to avoid harm or compliance, to being responsive in actively meeting reasonable stakeholder expectations, to being fully engaged in order to maximize economic, social and environmental value simultaneously. Different practices show us the important role these new partnerships play, as an instrument for innovation, in the development of sustainable food production chains with more added value and the development of sustainable agriculture in an attractive regional countryside.


99

Dairy calves performance on dairy farms around Gaborone Agricultural Region of Botswana

W. Mahabile 1# and H.O. deWaal 2

University of Gaborone Botswana, and University of Free State – South Africa

Abstract High calf mortality (26.3% from birth to the age of six months) implies that calf husbandry practices on dairy farms are poor. On-farm calf monitoring was done on 15 selected dairy farms in the Gaborone Agricultural Region to establish calf-rearing practices. On-farm visits were made fortnightly to collect among other data on calving, feeds offered, live weights, diseases and deaths of dairy calves. The data shows that calf husbandry practices were not different between dairy farms. Other than whole milk, sorghum bran, lucerne, grass hay and chicken litter were used to feed calves. Calf starter meal was used on 13% of the dairy farms. Feed quantities given to calves were not specified and calves were mainly housed in cow kraals and hence were group fed. Average live weight gains for calves were generally below 0.5 kg/d. Mortality rate were high (11.04%) on those dairy farms where calves were housed in cow kraals. The results suggest that Botswana dairy farmers need to be taught appropriate calf housing and feeding systems to improve calf performance in their herds.

Introduction Although commercial dairy farming in Botswana started about forty years ago, the national dairy herd still remains small (about 4500 cows) and herd productivity is also low: average milk production per cow is 2000 litres/per annum, birth rate is about 60% and calf mortality is 26.3%. The high calf mortality and low birth rate are among the most serious constraints in developing the national dairy herd and need to be urgently addressed. However, information is scanty on the factors that cause low productivity. It is important to understand these factors in order to develop intervention strategies. The underlying factors may include low birth weights (Stonaker, 1973), uncontrolled breeding leading to calves being born during seasons when they are more vulnerable to harsh conditions (Simensen & Norheim, 1983; Ghosh et

al., 1996) or poor feeding and management dairy calves are subjected to on dairy farms (TAHAL-NAMPAADD, 2000).

There is also no information available in Botswana on dairy calf feeds, feeding and housing systems. Information on on-farm performance of the dairy calves in general and heifer calves in particular for the national dairy herd is also lacking. The objective of this study, therefore, was to characterize feeding and management practices and quantify calf performance on-farm by close monitoring of selected dairy farms in the Gaborone agricultural region. Materials and Methods The Gaborone agricultural region (GAR) is located in the Southeastern part of Botswana and covers an area of 45 454 km2. The region receives relatively higher rainfall in both quantity (the long-term rainfall of 500 mm) and reliability and is increasingly becoming important for dairy development due to its high population growth, urbanisation and industralisation. The GAR can be described as the milk catchment area supplying milk to Gaborone, the capital and dominant city of Botswana.


100

Fifteen farms were selected from 24 registered commercial dairy farms in the region. The 15 dairy farms were categorised on basis of scale of operations as defined by TAHAL-NAMPAADD (2000), namely small-scale dairy farms having 1 to 50 cows, medium-scale dairy farms having 50 to 100 cows and large-scale dairy farms having more than 100 cows. Hence there were 11 small-scale dairy farms and 3 large-scale dairy farms in the GAR. Selection criteria included willingness of the farmer to participate in the calf monitoring study, as well as the location and accessibility of the dairy farm. The calf monitoring study was done between August 2001 and November 2003. Dairy farms were visited every fortnight and data recorded on the day of visit. All data recorded by the farmer between visits were also collected. Management and performance indicators such as feeds offered, calving, live weights, diseases, treatments and deaths were recorded for each calf born during that period, until the calf reached five months of age. Initially, individual feed offered to the calves was measured at each visit but this became difficult as study progressed.

Data were subjected to frequency analysis and Analysis of variance (ANOVA) using SAS (2001). Results and Discussion

A total of 324 calves were born on the fifteen dairy farms during the monitoring period (Table 1), compromising almost the same number of males (163) and females (161). Breed of the calves were Holstein-Friesian, Brown Swiss, Jersey, Tswana and cross breeds (such as Brahman* Holstein-Friesian, Tswana* Brown Swiss). Forty-seven percent of all calves born on the 15 dairy farms in the GAR were Holstein-Friesian, followed by Brown Swiss (26%) and Jersey (9%). This may indicate that the Holstein-Friesian and the Brown Swiss are the most popular or better performing dairy breeds in the GAR.


101

Table 1. Number and percentage of calves born and least square means (LSM) and

standarderror (s.e.) of birth weights of calves born by sex, breed and dam parity on the dairy

farms in the Gaborone Agricultural Region (GAR) of Botswana

Variable Number of observations

As % of the total number of calves born

Birth weights

(kg)

Calf sex

Males

Females

163

161

50.3

49.7

35.4 ± 7.6

34.2 ± 6.5

Calf breed

Holstein-Friesian

Brown Swiss

Crossbreeds

Jersey

Tswana

151

85

55

28

5

46.6

26.2

17.0

8.6

1.3

36.4 ± 6.6

36.9 ± 6.9

31.5 ± 6.6

28.1 ± 4.3

33.0 ± 3.8

Dam parity

1

2

3

4

5

6 and more

76

88

67

39

13

3

26.6

30.8

23.4

13.6

4.6

1.1

33.5 ± 1.0

34.5 ± 0.9

34.5 ± 1.1

35.8 ± 0.9

34.1 ± 2.0

30.0 ± 4.4

Although the Holstein-Friesian is a popular breed (or better performing) in the region, its feeding and management requirements as a large framed breed are way above the means of most dairy farmers in Botswana (Agricultural Research Council 2001; Webster, 1987). This could affect performance of the breed.

A significant number of crossbreed calves (55) were born on dairy farms, suggesting that dairy farmers used crossbreeding as a way of improving their dairy production. Most dairy farmers in Botswana evolved from beef farming and may not yet have the necessary skills needed for the high level of management required by the dairy production system. Therefore the use of crossbreeds would go a long way in helping farmers to evolve into dairy farming as they improve their management skills. The government of Botswana encourages new dairy farmers to use crossbreed cows, while more advanced farmers use exotic dairy breeds (S. Mosielele, 2002; personal communication).

Calving percentage (Table 2) was very low at 52.8% and 34.9% respectively in the first and second year of the study for small-scale dairy farms. Large-scale dairy farms reflected even lower calving percentages (33.8% and 19.6% respectively in the first and second year of the study). A relatively better calving percentage on small-scale dairy farms could suggest better management being possible with fewer cows. A possible cause of low calving percentages


102

may be inadequate feed resources (both quantity and quality) on dairy farms, which result in poorer physiological status of the cows, hence disturbances of their reproductive cycles.

During the study period, the rainfall in the GAR was above average (555 mm) though sporadic for the 2001/2002 rainy season, which could have influenced grazing positively and therefore yielding higher calving rates. During the 2002/2003 rainy season the rainfall was below average (300 mm) though fairly distributed. This situation could have led to inadequate feed resources and therefore yielded lower calving rates in 2002/2003. Another cause for the low calving percentages may have been long calving intervals (more than the ideal 13 months), with most cows missing a year without being pregnant. The long calving intervals further put a financial burden on the dairy farmer, as he/she continues to feed unproductive cows.

Table 2. Calving percentage of cows on the dairy farms in the Gaborone Agricultural Region

(GAR) of Botswana

Scale of farms No. of dairy cows Calving %

2001 to 2002

Calving %

2002 to 2003

Large

Small

116

34

33.8

52.8

19.6

34.9

The majority of the dairy farms (12) used cow kraals as the calving area (Table 3). On two dairy farms, paddocks were used as calving areas while only one dairy farm used a maternity ward as calving area. Both the cow kraals and paddocks were not disinfected, hence exposing the newly born calves to possible threats of disease infections (Sainsbury, 1983). Newly born calves may also have been exposed to trampling by older animals and to heat stress and cold weather, conditions which are not suitable for young calves (Mathewman, 1993).

Table 3. Number of dairy farms using various calving areas and percentage of calves born in

the respective calving areas on the dairy farms in the Gaborone Agricultural Region (GAR)

of Botswana

Scale of farms Calving area

Large Small

% of calves born

Cow kraal 2 10 62

Paddock 0 2 19

Maternity ward 1 0 15

Only 15% of the calves were born in maternity ward on a single large-scale dairy farm. A few calves (4%) on small-scale dairy farms were born in the bush or veld. Those calves born in the veld may be exposed to harsh weather conditions and predation by carnivores. Epidemiological and environmental evaluations indicate that a separate, disinfected maternity area or ward is important in a heifer calf management program (Anderson & Bates, 1983).


103

Although calves can be born outdoors without harmful effects during good weather conditions, the same paddock should not be used for calving year after year because diseases tend to build up and the cow and calf may become infected (Oliver, 1987). Ideally calving should take place in a special stall or “calving box” or a maternity ward which is designed to allow easy access for the operator and also facilitate easy cleaning. Only one dairy farm in the GAR had such a maternity ward (Table 3). This might be due to the fact that most of the dairy farmers do not yet understand the importance of hygiene and cleanliness for survival and performance of the newly born calves, while some may have financial constraints in developing improved calving areas on their dairy farms. The location of the housing after separation of the calf from the dam is one of the factors associated with average daily gain of the calf (Place et al., 1998). Rearing of calves in the cow barn or group pens is detrimental to average daily gain (ADG) compared with individual calf hutches or other housing outside the cow barns, as strong calves tend to consume most of the feed. The percentage of calves born in different seasons of the year is shown in Table 4. Calves were born all year round, because bulls were allowed to roam with the cows throughout the year. However, more calves were born in the summer (October 16 to February 28) than in any other season. More cows could have been in good condition for breeding and conception around January to May as the grazing situation on the range (veld) is still fair. Similar calving patterns have been observed in Western Australia (Hough & Sawyer, 1993). In the Sanyati communal farming area of Zimbabwe most calves (70%) were born during December to January (Pedersen & Madsen, 1998).

Table 4. Percentage of calves born in different seasons of the year on the dairy farms in the

Gaborone Agricultural Region (GAR) of Botswana

Season of birth %

Summer (October 16 to February 28) 38.3 Autumn (March 1 to May 15) 19.6 Winter (May 16 to August 15) 21.5 Spring (August 16 to October 15) 20.6

Source: Department of Meteorological Services, Ministry of Works, Transport and Communications

It is worth noting that the summers in Botswana are longer than the other seasons (Meteorological Services, Ministry of Works, Transport and Communications) and that summer is the main rainy season in Botswana. As spring sets in, most trees and shrubs start to bloom and in summer the range or veld condition is good due to rainfall. The quality of natural grass in terms of crude protein increases [Field, 1976; Animal Production Research Unit (APRU, 1977)], thus, providing improved feeding conditions for the semi-intensive dairy farms. Therefore, calves born in late spring and summer may be weaned onto good range (veld). There were mainly three housing types for calves used on dairy farms namely: calf pens, calf kraals and cow kraals. A typical improved traditional calf kraal used in Botswana is shown in Plate 1.


104

Plate 1. An improved traditional calf kraal on a dairy farm in the Gaborone Agricultural

Region (GAR) of Botswana.

Cow kraals were used as calf housing on 53.3% of the dairy farms, while calf kraals were used on 33.3% of the dairy farms. Calf pens were used on only 13.4% of the dairy farms. Both large-scale and small-scale dairy farms used the three above-mentioned housing types. The importance of housing newly born calves until they are weaned has been emphasised (Thickett et al., 1988; Oliver, 1987). However, Jenny et al. (1981) emphasised that it is not the type of calf housing but the quality of management within such calf houses which influences calf performance.

The use of inappropriate calf housing systems such as cow kraals and calf kraals on the majority of the dairy farms in the GAR is a cause for concern, because calves may be exposed to environmental conditions impacting negatively on calf performance. Similar group housing in Zimbabwe has been observed to limit ADG (0 to 2 months to 0.39 kg/day and at 2 to 5 months to 0.3 kg/day) (Pedersen & Madsen, 1998), while in Kenya the system was characterised with stunted growth of calves and high mortalities (Lanyasunya et al., 1998). Calves housed in either cow or calf kraals are not protected from rainfall, strong sunlight or cold weather, because the kraals have no roofs. Calves are also exposed to diseases. Calves housed in groups may also be fed inadequately. Spain and Spiers, (1996) and Mathewman, (1993) have discussed the importance of appropriate housing types for young calves. Use of individual calf pens that provides effective separation for each calf and allows the caretaker to provide appropriate calf management have been recommended (Thickett et al., 1988; Miller, 1979). Inadequate or improper housing during the first few months of life could contribute to high calf mortality


105

(Moeller & Friday, 1973) especially due to over-crowding and a build-up of internal parasites (Peters, 1986).

Figure 1. Percentage of dairy farms using one of the three particular calf housing types in

the Gaborone Agricultural Region (GAR) of Botswana.

The cleaning of cow kraals and calf kraals and/or the removal of wet dung in those kraals is not done daily or not done at all. Lanyasunya et al. (1998) worked with smallholder dairy farms in Kenya and observed that accumulation of manure, strong odour and congestion characterised both cow and calf kraals. Accumulation of manure, especially during rainy seasons poses a health hazard to calves. In Zimbabwe, gastro-intestinal nematode eggs were found in faeces of cows and calves from the end of the dry season until the end of the rainy season (Petersen & Madsen, 1998). Calves sharing the same facilities with mature animals stood a higher chance of being infected. However, this aspect was not monitored in this study on the dairy farms in the GAR.

In all dairy farms, it was observed that after birth, the period calves were left with their dams to suckle colostrum ranged from 1 to 8 days, with an average of 5 days. Other than whole milk, the main feeds used in rearing unweaned calves were sorghum bran (used on 87% of the farms), lucerne (Mediago sativa, also commonly known as alfalfa) (used on 47% of the farms) and grass hay and chicken litter (each used on 27% of the farms). Salt (NaCl) was used on 13% of the farms. Calf starter meal was also used on only 13% of the dairy farms while calf grower was used on only seven percent of the dairy farms. According to the dairy farmers, other feeds such as dairy meal, drought pellets, winter leak, oats hay, hominy chop, spent grain, beef finisher, pan feed and molasses were used to a limited extent on dairy farms. Mostly the large-scale dairy farms used commercial feeds while small-scale dairy farms depended mainly on cheaper and locally available sorghum bran. It is possible that most dairy farms are discouraged by the high prices of commercial concentrates.

Cow kraals Calf pens Calf kraals

53.333.3

13.4


106

Calf performance in the different categories of dairy farms is shown in Table 5. Average daily live weight gains from birth to five months of age were generally low and were not significantly different (P>0.05) between the large-scale and the small-scale dairy farms, a reflection that both large-scale and small-scale dairy farms managed calves relatively similar. Similar ADG’s (0.39 kg/day until 2 months of age and 0.31 kg/day from 2 to 5 months) were recorded in the Sanyati communal farming area of Zimbabwe (Pederson & Madsen, 1998). These calf growth rates are relatively low compared to the target ADG (0.5 to 0.75 kg/day) for calves at 5 months of age (Oliver, 1987). Poor feeding; either in terms of quantity or quality on dairy farms in Botswana may be the main reason for the observed low live weight gains.

Table 5. Mean (± s.e.) birth weight, weight at five months of age and live weight gains of

calves on the large-scale and the small-scale dairy farms in the Gaborone Agricultural

Region (GAR) of Botswana Scale of

farm Mean birth weight (kg)

Mean live weight (kg) at

5 months

Daily live weight gain (kg/day)

Mortality (%)

Large 34.7±0.7 a (87) 78.0±3.8 a (48) 0.36±0.03 a (47) 13.0 Small 34.0±0.7 a (77) 85.5±3.5 a (57) 0.38±0.03 a (55) 13.0

a Means with the same superscript in a column are not significantly different (P<0.05) Numbers in parenthesis denote number of calves

Live weight gains were the same between different feed combinations, the latter depending on the availability of feeds. Generally feed quantities given to calves were not specified, which may lead to calves not being properly fed (underfed), hence low live weight gains (below 0.5kg/day) as reflected between farm categories, feed combinations and type of calf houses (Table 6). In general heifer calves are expected to gain above 0.5kg/day from 3 months of age. Bortone et al. (1994) recommends that Holstein heifers should grow at 0.70 kg/day from 3-24 months of age. Live weight gains did not differ between male and female calves.


107

Table 6. Mean (± s.e.) birth weight, weight at five months of age, live weight gains and

percent mortality of dairy calves fed various combinations of feeds on the

dairy farms in the Gaborone Agricultural Region (GAR) of Botswana

Combination of feeds Mean birth weight (kg)

Mean live weight (kg) at

5 months

Live weight gains (kg/day) Mortality (%)

Calf starter meal, lucerne and grass hay

37.1±7.5 a (49) 80.2±3.8 a (49) 0.33±0.03 a (48) 8.58

Poultry litter, sorghum bran and grass hay

31.2±5.5 a (36) 78.9±4.4 a (36) 0.40±0.03 a (34) 8.58

Lucerne, sorghum bran and grass hay

36.6±7.8 a (12) 94.8±7.7 a (12) 0.45±0.05 a (12) 4.95

Sorghum bran, grass hay and salt 34.2±5.6 a (5) 84.8±11.9 a (5) 0.33±0.09 a (5) 0.66 Sorghum bran 36.3±10.1 a (3) 95.3±15.3 a (3) 0.42±0.04 a (3) 2.97 a Means with the same superscript in a column are not significantly different (P<0.05) Numbers in parenthesis denote number of calves

Live weight gains for calves (Table 6) that were fed commercial feeds such as calf starter meal and lucerne were not significantly different (P>0.05) to live weight gains of calves fed cheaper feeds such as sorghum bran. This might be because the amount of feed given to calves were not measured or specified and feeding of expensive feeds may have been restricted. This situation may lead to calves not being properly fed, hence, low live weight gains and high mortality rates. Muller and Botha (2000) in South Africa observed different ADG’s when Friesian calves were fed different diets, emphasising the influence of nutrition on performance of calves (Mathewman, 1993). Mean calf live weights at five months and live weight gains of calves housed in various housing types are shown in Table 7. Live weight gains were not significantly different (P>0.05) between calf housing types, but the calves housed in cow kraals tended to have higher ADG’s than those housed in calf pens or calf kraals. The high ADG’s was not expected, as the general tendency for calves housed in groups is to have lower ADG’s, since there is more competition for feed and greater chance of pathogen transfer between animals. Other workers have also observed similar trends of lower ADG’s in Zimbabwe (Pedersen & Madsen, 1998), Pennsylvania, USA (Place et al., 1998) and the Netherlands (Hanekamp et

al., 1994). It is possible that calves in cow kraals could have been suckling their dams, thus having access to more milk than calves housed separately and bucket fed. It was observed in this study in the GAR of Botswana that suckling calves also tended to be weaned later.


108

Table 7. Mean (± s.e.) birth weight, weight at five months of age, live weight gains and

percent mortality of dairy calves in various housing types on the dairy farms in the Gaborone

Agricultural Region (GAR) of Botswana Calf housing

type Mean birth weight

(kg) Mean live weight (kg) at 5 months

Live weight gain (kg/day)

Mortality (%)

Cow kraal 33.6 ± 6.5 a (60) 87.1 ± 3.4 a (60) 0.41 ± 0.02 a (59) 5.35 Calf pen 36.4 ± 7.3 a (31) 80.6 ± 4.8 a (31) 0.37 ± 0.03 a (30) 8.7 Calf kraal 37.5 ± 10.0 a (13) 64.8 ± 7.4 a (13) 0.22 ± 0.05 a (12) 11.04

a Means with the same superscript in a column are not significantly different (P<0.05) Numbers in parenthesis denote number of calves

High calf mortality (Table 7) where calves were housed in cow kraals compared to those housed in either calf pens or calf kraals indicate that cow kraals are not the best housing systems for calves. Cow kraals are not cleaned regularly and tend to be muddy during the rainy season, leading to a build-up of diseases. Parker (1968) has associated housing young calves with older animals with poor performance and high incidences of respiratory disease in calves. Causes for a significant number of deaths (46% of those that died) could not be specified. Diarrhoea and calf paratyphoid were associated with 28% and 8% of the deaths respectively. A survey by Spence and Woodhead (2000) stated that calf scours were considered a problem by 51% of the farmers. There was only one death due to predation while one calf died due to a car accident. Fifteen percent of the carcasses were sent to the laboratory for postmortem. However only one farmer reported that the postmortem results indicated that the calf died due to heart water. Conclusions Although the dairy farms in the GAR were categorised in two scales of operation (large-scale and small-scale dairy farms based on the number of cows) their calf husbandry was similar and below standard. The calving areas predisposed the newly born calves to cross infection from older animals and other dangers, thus contributing to similar high mortalities across the scale of operation. Young calves were also housed together with grown up animals in open cow kraals. This made dairy calves susceptible to both environmental hazards and disease transfers from older animals and also creates competition for scarce feed supplements. There was no deliberate effort to ensure timely and adequate access to and consumption of colostrum neither was the amount of milk offered closely monitored. This could result in underfeeding of the pre-weaned calves, contributing to low growth rates and high incidences of morbidity and mortality. Appropriate calf feeds such as calf starter meals and calf grower meals were not widely used on dairy farms, mainly because they were expensive. Sorghum bran was the main solid feed used on dairy farms. Dairy farmers did not monitor the amount of feed given daily to each calf, leading to calves being probably underfed. This type of feeding system contributed to low performance of calves in terms of growth rates, morbidity and mortality. As farmers generally did not know causes of calf deaths and did not follow-up on postmortem results, calves may continue to die from controllable diseases and situations. Local dairy farmers need to be taught about the importance of appropriate calf housing, calf diseases and feeding systems for improved calf performance.


109

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank cooperating farmers for allowing us to monitor their calves. Appreciation is extended to the Ministry of Agriculture through Department of Agricultural Research (DAR) for support. Mr. J. Makore is indebted for assisting with the statistical analysis and Dr. P. Wandera for editing this paper. References Anderson, J.F., & Bates, D.W., 1983. From calves to springers in less than 24 months. Proc.

2nd Natl. Dairy Housing Conf. p. 251. Animal Production Research Unit, 1977. An Integrated programme of Beef Cattle and Range

Research in Botswana. Animal Production Research Unit 1977. Ministry of Agriculture, Gaborone, Botswana.

Agricultural Research Council, 2001. Dairy herd improvement in South Africa. In LOUBSTER, L.F.B., BANGA, C.B., SCHOLTZ, M.M. & HALLOWELL, G.J., (ed.). Agricultural Research Council Animal Improvement Institute, Irene.

Bortone, E.J., Morrill, J.L., & Feyerherm, A.M., 1994. Growth of heifers fed 100 or 115% of National Research Council requirements to 1 year of age and then changed to another treatment. J Dairy Sci. 77, 270-277.

Field, D.I., 1976. A handbook of common grasses in Botswana p. 152. Agricultural Resources Board 1975. Ministry of Agriculture, Gaborone, Botswana.

Ghosh, S.K., Ray, S.K., Pyne, A.K. & Dattagupta, R., 1996. Factors affecting calf mortality. Indian Vet. J. 73, 1277-1279.

Hanekamp, W.J.A., Smits, A.C. & Wierenga, H.K., 1994. Open versus closed barn and individual versus group housing for bull calves destined for beef production. Livest. Prod. Sci. 37:261-270.

Hough, G.M., & Sawyer, G.J., 1993. Aspects of heifer management which limit productivity on dairy farms in Western Australia: a survey. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 33: 833-837.

Jenny, B.F., Grambling, G.E. & Glaze, T.M., 1981. Management factors associated with calf mortality in South Carolina dairy herds. J. Dairy Sci. 64: 2284-2289.

Lanyasunya, T.P., Wekesa ,F.W., Osinga, A. & De Jong, R., 1998. On-farm testing of improved calf rearing technologies in Naivasha, Kenya. In BEZUNEH, S., OUEDRAOGO, S., MENYONGA, J.M., ZONGO, J.D. & OUEDRAOGO, M. (ed.). Towards sustainable farming systems in Sub-Saharan Africa p. 529-541.

Mathewman, R.J., 1993. Calf rearing. Dairying, The tropical Agriculture. p. 32-48. The Macmillan Press Ltd. London and Basingstoke.

Miller, W. J., 1979. Feeding and raising the young dairy calf p. 308. Dairy cattle feeding and nutrition. Animal Feeding and Nutrition. Academic Press, Inc. Orlando, Florida 32887.

Moeller, N.J. & Friday, W H., 1973. Considerations in selecting dairy calf housing ID-93 Cooperative Extension Service. Purdue University. Accessed 6 August 2002: http_dir/b_save/acsonline/ID- 93-15k

Muller, C.J.C. & Botha, J.A., 2000. Growth parameters of Holstein-Friesland heifers reared on complete diets containing different roughages. S. Afr. J. of Anim. Sci.30. (1): 67-69

Oliver J., 1987. Calf and heifer rearing p.132. In OLIVER J., (ed.) Dairy Farmers Handbook. National Association of Dairy Farmers of Zimbabwe. Mount Pleasant, Harare.


110

Place, N.T., Heinrichs, A.J. & Erb, H.N., 1998. The effects of disease, management, and nutrition on average daily gain of dairy heifers from birth to four months. J. Dairy Sci. 81: 1004-1009.

Parker, W.H., 1968. Housing requirements II. Requirements of good housing and effects of bad housing. Vet. Res. 83:364.

Pederson, C. & Madsen, J., 1998. Constraints and opportunities for improved milk production and calf rearing in Sanyati communal farming area, Zimbabwe. Liv. Res. for Rural Dev., Volume 10, Number 1. Accessed 21 September 2004: www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd10/1/pede101.htm

Peters, A.R., 1986. Some husbandry factors affecting mortality and morbidity on a calf-rearing unit. Vet. Rec. 119 (14): 355-357.

Sainsbury, D., 1983. Animal Health: Health, disease and welfare of farm livestock p. 81. Granada Publishing, Great Britain.

Spain, J.N. & Spiers, D.E., 1996. Effects of supplemental shade on thermoregulatory response of calves to heat challenge in a hutch environment. J. Dairy Sci. 79: 639-646.

Spence, S.A. & Woodhead A.C., 2000. The relationship between management practices and estimated weight for age of Friesian heifers in north-eastern New South Wales. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 40:357-362.

TAHAL-NAMPAAD, 2000. National Master Plan for Arable agriculture and Dairy Development (NAMPAADD), Ministry of Agriculture, Botswana.

Thickett, B., Mitchell, D. & Hallows, B., 1988. Calf housing p. 105. Calf rearing. 2nd ed. Farming Press. United Kingdom.

Stonaker, H.H., 1973. Crossbreeding beef cattle. Series 2 (Eds.) University Presses of Florida. pp. 4-17.

SAS Institute Inc., 2001. SAS/STATR Software: Usage and reference, Version 6.04. Cary NC: SAS Institute Inc.

Simensen, E. & Norhein, K., 1983. An epidemiological study of calf health and performance in Norwegian dairy herds. Acta Agric. Scand. 33: 65-74.

Webster, J., 1987. Introduction: The dairy cow of today. Understanding the dairy cow p. 3, 17, 123, 340. BSP Professional Books.


111

Poverty Reduction In Hill Farming Systems Of Nepal Through More Equitable Access To Local Resources

Maharjan A, Schulz S, Rajbhandari N, Regmi B., Dhital B, Paudel. C and Hada N.

Sustainable Soil Management Programme, Helvetas/Nepal

Abstract

Majority of hill population depend on agriculture as their source of livelihood but its performance is determined by the weather and constrained by structural weaknesses, including the difficult terrain, dispersed population, insufficient transport network, and limited irrigation facilities. Hence, poverty is wide spread in hills of Nepal. There is wide inequity in distribution of limited resources. In this paper, SSMP's efforts towards reducing poverty in hills of Nepal through more equitable access to local resources are described. The major interventions towards this effort are capacity building at local level, increasing access to agricultural inputs and knowledge and activities for benefiting the ultra poor. SSMP has developed capacity of local level service providing institutions and local people and in promoting capacity of local farmers focus is given in gender integration. The other intervention is in improving access of local community to knowledge on agriculture, inputs and market. Also SSMP has worked in increasing access of the poorest of the poor section (the ultra poor groups) to community land. In collaboration with the forestry sector organizations/programmes like District Forest Office, community forestry projects and leasehold forestry projects, the access of poor on community forest lands is being increased for undertaking various income generating activities.

Overview of Farming System in Hills of Nepal Nepal is geographically divided into three regions – Mauntain, Hills and Terai and administratively it is divided into five development regions. Majority of the hill population in Nepal depend on agriculture as their source of livelihood. Farming is mostly carried out in slopes (Bari land), tars and valleys (Khet land). The farming system is characterized by complex, interlinked and interdependent material and energy recycling involving crops production, forestry/agro-forestry and livestock sector. Majority of farmers in this region hold small pieces of land and there is basically two type of cropping system prevalent in the area. The major cropping patter is Maize-millet/other crops in the Bari land without irrigation and the second is Rice cultivation in Khet land with irrigation or rainfed followed by wheat or pulses. The productivity of the farming system is under decline due to decreasing soil fertility caused by nutrient mining and soil erosion and this is more pronounced in case of the poor farm households whose livelihoods entirely depend on bari-dominated farming systems (Dhital et al, 2004). Though farming is the major source of livelihood its performance is determined by the weather and constrained by structural weaknesses, including the difficult terrain, dispersed population, insufficient transport network, and limited irrigation facilities. Hence, poverty is wide spread in hills of Nepal. About 34.5% of hill population lives below the line of poverty and of the total poor in the country, hills account for 47.1% which is the highest among the geographical regions (CBS, 2005). This paper presents SSMP's experiences and efforts towards reducing the poverty in hill farming community by increasing access to various agricultural resources.


112

State Of Resource Distribution There is vast inequity in distribution of agriculture resources like land, improved seed, irrigation, chemical fertilizers and agricultural equipment in Nepal. The detail is given in table 1. Distribution of agricultural land is highly skewed towards the larger farmers. Small farmers (with <0.5 ha of land) operate only 13 percent of total agricultural land while 31 percent of the land is operated by large farmers (with > 2 ha of land). Holdings with access to irrigation increased from 51% in 1991/92 to 60% in 2001/02 in the country, however; there is wide disparity in irrigated area between the geographical region and the size of holding. Only a very small portion of farmers has access to improved seeds in Nepal. Paddy, wheat and Maize are the major crops grown by Nepalese farmers; however use of improved seeds in these crops is very low. Many pockets of the country are by default undertaking organic cultivation due to lack of access to chemical fertilizers. Access to government agriculture delivery system is limited and this is further being concentrated to more accessible areas with the escalation of present armed conflict in the country. Table 1: Situation in resource distribution by ecological zones

Ecological/Geographical zones Particulars Unit

Mountains Hills Terai

Average size of agricultural holding Ha 0.9 0.7 1.0

Average household size of agri households No 5.2 5.1 6.0

%age of area irrigated % 44.7 36.8 68.6

%age HHs using improved seeds %

Paddy % 2.2 3.3 7.5

Wheat % 2.9 2.5 9.1

Summer Maize % 3.6 3.8 6.1

Vegetables % 3.8 26.6 48.7

% of HHs using fertilizers %

Paddy % 40.2 58.3 77.1

Wheat % 21.7 41.7 77.5

Summer Maize % 45.6 37.0 17.5

Vegetables % 2.2 9.4 17.5

Source: CBS, 2004

Poverty reduction through intervention in NRM sector is a long tried strategy of Swiss development intervention in Nepal. In order to address the issue of discrimination "Livelihood and inclusion" component forms an important component in the Swiss intervention in development in Nepal. Both SDC and Helvetas/Nepal focuses on strengthening the capacity of rural people to maintain and improve their livelihood. The major focus/target group of both these organizations is the disadvantaged groups of people, who are economically poor and are discriminated based on caste, gender, and resource distribution.


113

Poverty Reduction in Hills of Nepal – SSMP's Efforts SSMP works in 12 mid hill districts of Nepal covering all the five development region of the country. The working districts are selected based on assessment of four criterion, namely, human development index, women empowerment index, natural resources endowment index and percentage of farming population. Under the present armed conflict situation, however, the fifth criterion of security situation of the area is also considered. The priority target group is the bari dominated small farmers in the mid hills. In line with the strategy of the Swiss cooperation in Nepal, SSMP has consistently made efforts to reach to the poor sector of the community by addressing various options for improving their livelihood and reducing poverty. SSMP has adopted two complementary approaches to promote the SSM practices4. SSMP's efforts towards reducing poverty in hills of Nepal through more equitable access to local resources is described briefly below:

Capacity Building at Local Level Access to information and local capacity are indispensable for development of any country or area. With this view, SSMP has made specific efforts to develop local capacity on SSM technologies. SSMP since its inception has providing trainings on SSM practices and other methodological issues like gender integration, PPME, diffusion approach etc to the CI staff. Over the years a total of 1039 staff (23% women) have been trained in various technical trainings and 560 (32% women) trained on methodological issues. Also SSMP facilitates in establishing linkage/collaboration between the GOs and the NGOs for quality service delivery to the rural farmers.

Capacity building of local farmers is another focus of SSMP implementation approach. Under the CI piloting approach, from each group of farmers one or two farmers are selected as Leader Farmer (LF) by the group and these LFs are trained by the CI staff on SSM technologies. After getting trainings, these LFs train their group members and also demonstrate the technologies in their own farms. This is one way of developing the capacity of local farmers in the area. In the year 2004-05, a total of 3168 were trained. Another way of developing local human resource is through developing Local Resource Persons (LRPs) in specific topics like vegetable production with SSM, PPME, gender integration, etc who can then provide services to farmers in the area. So far 13 LRPs on legume cultivation, 25 on vegetable cultivation with SSM, 16 on Farmers led experimentation, 9 on PPME and 26 on Gender integration have been developed to provide services to the local community.

4 SSMP working modality consists of:

CI piloting approach: where SSM technologies are delivered through a forum of collaborating institution (GOs, NGos, CBOs) through a competitive grant system Farmer to farmer diffusion approach: used for diffusion of SSM technologies to wider hill farmers outside the CI area through network of experience leader farmers.


114

Under the F-t-F approach the Leader farmer who have demonstrated SSM technologies for over 2 years are given further trainings on technical issues and communication skill and then are used for providing trainings to other farmer groups in the nearby areas as ELF and a total of 439 ELFs (32% women) have been developed over the years. This is a step towards setting the trend of buying services in agriculture sector, which is not seen in the present context. 3.2 Gender integration in programme

implementation. Since its inception, SSMP has adopted positive discrimination strategy towards inclusion of women in the programme. SSMP is striving for more qualitative participation from women, that is, women in key leadership and decision-making positions. About 50% of leader farmers and 32% of the experienced leader farmers are women. Apart from active participation of women, SSMP is also promoting analysis of impact of SSM technologies on women. For this simple reflection and commitment tools have been developed (Bajracharya B., 2004). Based on these analysis SSMP has introduced few labour reducing technologies/equipments to ease the workload borne by women farmers. One such intervention is the introduction of radish seed thresher in Sindhupalchowk and Dolakha district (see Box 1).

3.3 Improved Access to Local Resource and its Impact on Rural Poor Majority of farmers in mid hill has small pieces of holding which they have to best use to sustain their livelihood. Most of the SSM technologies are based on optimal use of local resources with judicious use of external inputs. The major technologies promoted by SSMP are given in the Box 2.

Box 2: Priority topics for the promotion of SSM are:

• Soil organic matter management (FYM improvement, composting, Integrated Plant Nutrient Management) for enhancing productivity and sustainability,

• Mixed cropping systems and integration of grain, herbaceous and tree legumes into farming systems for productivity and soil conservation,

• Fodder cultivation, stall feeding and organic waste recycling,

• Promotion of vegetable and other high value crops in combination with sustainable soil management practices (fruit, coffee, groundnut and ginger cultivation with SSM),

• Soil moisture management and complementary irrigation (if based on SSM).

Box 1: Farmers in Sunkhani are of Sindhupalchowk had taken up radish seed production with support from

SDC and later SSMP. The crop yield as well as market was good and the farmers were happy with the additional income that they were making with the crop. However, the womenfolk complained about the backbreaking job of threshing radish seeds (threshing is considered all women work). This problem was put up by the women in the group meeting and the local CI staff together with SSMP decided to try radish seed thresher in the area. With the introduction of thresher men are helping their women in peddling. The machine can thresh upto 70kg/day as against manual threshing of 20kg/day. Therefore, 3 days worth manual work is reduced to one day. Moreover, there is drastic reduction in drudgery faced by women in radish seed threshing. Looking at this success, another CI in neighboring Dolakha district has also demonstrated the technology, which is widely appreciated by the farmers and the farmer groups are demanding more machines to be purchased from their groups fund.

Picture 1 : A women LF teaching her group on urine application in Parbat district.


115

Box 4: A farmer from Doti district recalls that "From

an area of one anna (31 sq mt.) under Maize-millet cropping system one can earn a gross income of about NRs.110 (US$ 1.5), whereas same area under Arahar (pigeonpea) can earn gross income of around NRs.1000 (US$14). We have been unable to take this opportunity from our land just because we did not have any knowledge about Arahar cultivation earlier. Now our eyes are open."

Box 3: The ultra-poor group started to

produce compost at commercial scale from 2003. All the group members have prepared a compost pit (2X2.5X1m3) this they filled local plant material, which are considered a weed by farmers. They use cattle urine as catalyst for decomposition. The compost is completely decomposed in a period of about 1.5 months. Each household produce about 110 kg compost at one time and sell them @6 NRs per kg. By this way they earned NRs.5280 (US$ 75.5) in a year. This income covers about 60% of total annual household expenditure.

For sustaining the soil fertility of fragile hills, organic matter management is of utmost importance. Timely availability of chemical fertilizers in the remote areas without road access is a big challenge and improving and conserving nutrient content in FYM could be an alternative for maintaining soil fertility and productivity in the hill farming system. Around 50% of the households covered have adopted one or more technology for improving their FYM and the improved FYM showed an increase in nitrogen content by 50% over the traditionally made FYM (SSMP, 2004). One group of ultra poor farmers have even taken up compost making as an enterprise (see Box 3)

Legume integration also helps in reducing nutrient mining from the soil and at the same time increase per unit income from limited land resource (Box 4). Likewise, to make best use of limited land resources, improving productivity of crops by using improved seed, and moving from traditional cereal based system to cash crops also helps. The per unit land return from cash crop is higher than that from cereal crops.

Vegetables are a relatively new commodity in most hill areas and the area under vegetables increased by more than 140% in 2003 when compared to the year 1999 (Dhital et al, 2004). Vegetable cultivation has increased per capita household income by US$60, which is 26% of the average annual income of Nepali households (the annual per capita income in Nepal amounts to US$230). Improving access to community land is another issue being addressed by SSMP. In the recent years in Nepal, few initiatives have been made to improved access of rural poor to community lands. Mostly the forestry sector organizations/programmes like District Forest Office, community forestry projects and leasehold forestry projects the policy to make community forest lands to the poorest section of the community for various income generating activities. SSMP supported ultra poor groups have also been able to benefit from this collaboration between SSMP and the forestry organizations/projects. More and more ultra poor groups are getting access to community forest land for meeting their fodder/forage requirements and also for undertaking various income generating activities like cultivation of NTFPs (Box 5).


116

Box 5: Bipanna sub-Group, Sundrawati, Dolakha has been supported with goat keeping activity. In order

to meet the demands for grasses, the households were supported with knowledge on fodder/forage grasses and with a nursery. From this nursery, each household has cultivated forages grasses in their terrace risers, which provides the group members with necessary grass to feed their goats. However, since the members have very limited land holdings, the community forest in the area has allocated 76 hectares of land for the selected poor households to undertake income generating activities with support from the Nepal Swiss Community Forestry Programme. Of these 76 hectares, the group has cultivated fodder/forage in about 1 hectare land to meet the fodder requirement of the households and in the remaining they plan to cultivate NTFPs.

Linkage to Market for Inputs and Output Marketing

SSMP has initiated recently small intervention for marketing the vegetable products. Normally to the small holders in Nepal, per farm production of fresh vegetable is usually lower than the economic scale which thereby increases cost of marketing and narrows down the net profit to the farmers. Therefore a group approach of marketing has been initiated as a pilot for the better linkage of fresh vegetable produced by the farmers. A local level fresh vegetable producer’s network has been formed and one or two farmers among the executive members are given responsibility of overall management of vegetable from the collection centre. A basic training on concept of marketing was organized in these selected piloting districts. Farmers learned to calculate the production and marketing cost, profit maximization by reducing cost and pricing mechanism. Farmers also discussed about various approaches to link their production to the market during the training. Effort to address marketing concerns is relatively new in SSMP and it would be premature to report on the results. However, the early results seen so far already shows a positive trend in reducing huge marketing margin often charged by involvement of chain of middlemen. Linkages to input market: Demand of inputs from individual holdings are small, for an instance, vegetable seeds, and hence bulk purchase by the individual farmer is not possible. While purchasing in small amounts, quality and the cost are the biggest concern. Group of small farmers formed a network in Syangja district to deal with the purchase of seeds. Quantity and types of seed required is collected by the network in advance and the network members have established linkage with the Agrovet for supply of the quality seed. In this arrangement, the small farmers get dual benefit- assurance of quality seed and cheaper prices.


117

Reaching to the Ultra Poor Looking at the history of development intervention in Nepal, a small sector but the most poor sector of the community have always fallen through most development initiatives. Elite group continue their strong hold on resource management decision-making, including community funds. Elites are in general capturing project benefits (Rai, S. 2004). In order to reach the ultra poor sector of the community, SSMP has initiated targeted activities focused towards the identified ultra poor households. SSMP defines ultra poor households as:

• with less than 3 months of food security from own production.

• without a permanent alternative source of income

• with little (<1500 sq. mt.) or no land This activity was piloted by 6 CIs initially in 2002 but has been expended to 32 CIs in 2004. More than 80% of the benefiting households belong to the discriminated lower caste groups (Dalits and Janajatis). By involving them into group activities the issues of social exclusion is also being effected positively by default. The process involved in the implementation of these programme are:

• Selection of ultra poor households.

• Identification of most feasible activities.

• Planning of the activity implementation

• Implementation of the activities.

• Monitoring and evaluation. Selection of poor households is vital and is done in participatory way with presence of entire community, to ensure that the existing wealth gap doesn't get further widened. CI facilitates the process to reduce conflict and gain appreciative support from the community. After selection of the beneficiaries, they identify the most feasible activities based on the local opportunities and challenges. Here again the CI facilitates and various participatory planning tools are used. Some criteria for selection are - availability of required inputs, possible risks, access to potential markets, and sustainability of the activity. Once the activities are selected then detailed plans are made. Any intervention targeting the ultra poor need a long-term planning (minimum of 3 years). Action plans are made for all the three year. The households, under the overall supervision and regular follow up from the CI, implements the activities and the programme is jointly monitored by the group and the CI in a participatory way (Brajacharya et al, 2004.). In this period of three years, more than 75% of the selected households selected goat keeping activity. The major reason for this being:

• can be raised on local resources

• does not compete for labour with other income sources of a household

• pay back period is usually about a year.

• lack of other alternatives sources. Goat raising for livelihood improvement of ultra poor households have been a topic of intense debate in Nepal. However, the results seen over the last two years show a positive indication towards livelihood improvement of the ultra poor households. Table 2 shows that on average individual households have increased their income by NRs.2663 or US$38 (average of 35% of total annual income of the ultra poor households with average annual income of US$107 and 16.5% of total annual income Nepali households).

Picture 2: A women with her goat and baby.


118

Table 2: Progress in goat keeping activity in the year 2004

Income Added goats District

No. of

HH

No. of goats sold

Total (NRs.)

Per HH (NRs.)

No. of goats added

Total (NRs.)

Per HH (NRs.)

Income/HH through

goats

Baglung 128 61 128100 1135 96 144000 1209 2344

Baitadi 50 66 60150 1203 62 93000 1860 3063

Dolakha 90 32 68800 681 106 159000 1699 2380

Parbat 80 70 147980 1956 61 91500 1258 3213

Syangja 52 35 60140 1153 50 75000 1417 2570

Sindhupalchowk 102 45 132600 1273 86 129000 1133 2407

Total 502 309 597770 1234 461 691500 1429 2663

Some Lessons Learnt SSMP has initiated efforts and activities to promote more equitable access to agricultural resources like improved seed, organic fertilizers, agriculture information/knowledge/service and marketing of products. However, these are very small interventions and more efforts are needed at national level to really make a difference in the livelihood of hill farmers at large. Some learning from are given below:

• In order to improve the livelihood of poor- empowerment, availability of resources and capacity to access these resources is very important. So any development intervention should address all these three simultaneously to have a tangible impact.

• In the times of armed conflict, capacitating local people for service delivery is much more effective than service provision through outsiders.

• For sustainability of technologies, it is required to capacitate the local organizations and persons who then act as the carrier of the knowledge. They are more accountable to the community that they serve as compared to outsiders since they are part of that community.

• Unless and until targeted programmes are launched for reaching out to the poorest of the poor of the community, it is very difficult to include this section of the community in the programmes/projects.

• For the subsistence based farmers with limited access to external resources, farming system based on low external input is more suitable and affordable.

• Small interventions in linking farmers to market, without killing the local set up, best suits the small rural farmers in Nepal.

References: Bajracharya B., 2004 . Progress Report on Gender equity focused activities implemented by

SSMP (2000 - 2003), Sustainable Soil Management Programme, Helvetas/Nepal, SSMP document series no 112.

Brajacharya B., Maharjan A. and Pahadi G., 2004. Guidelines for Poverty focused programme, Sustainable Soil Management Programme, Helvetas/Nepal, SSMP document series no 113

Central Bureau of Statistics, 2005. Summary Results on Poverty Analysis from Nepal Living

Standard Survey 2003/04. National planning commission Secretariat HMG Nepal. Central Bureau of Statistics, 2004. Nepal Living Standard Survey 2003/04: Statistical Report

Vol II. National planning commission Secretariat HMG Nepal.


119

Dhital et al, 2005. Diffusion of Improved Sustainable Soil Management Practices in the hills of Nepal through Innovative Extension Approaches: Experiences from SSMP, paper presented in EFARD 2005 Conference, Zurich Switzerland.

Rai, S., 2005. The Contribution of SDC Activities to Poverty Reduction". SDC/Nepal document.

SSM-P. 2004. Study on the adoption of Sustainable Soil Management Practices and their Impact on Livelihoods. Compiled by R.R. Adhikari for Sustainable Soil Management Programme, Helvetas Nepal, SSM-P Document series no 116.


120

The Use Of SWOT Analysis In Participatory Soil Conservation Planning Under Smallholder Farming Systems.

M. Manjoro, N. M Alonso, J. M. Fébles

Bindura University, Zimbabwe and Universidad Agraria de La Habana, Cuba

Abstract The paper presents preliminary results from a study carried out in the Havana Province, Cuba with the objective to evaluate the usefulness of SWOT analysis in participatory soil conservation planning. The study involved a participatory diagnosis of the major soil erosion problems through focus group discussions, problem censuses and structured interviews with farmers. The preliminary findings showed that a SWOT analysis is useful in participatory planning of soil conservation projects permitting the extension service providers and local farmers to jointly identify existing problems, priorities and potential of farming systems and formulate possible strategic options basing on the full knowledge of the system instead of imposing preconceived solutions without the active involvement of the intended beneficiaries. The study recommended that more research be done to widen the empirical base for the evaluation of the usefulness of SWOT analyses in agriculture and natural resource management specifically to improve the process of technology development and transfer in resources poor communities.

Introduction In many parts of the Third World, small-scale farmers face severe problems of decreasing agricultural yields as a result of soil erosion. However, despite the many concerted efforts to deal with this problem, the results have not been very promising (Hudson and Cheatle, 1993). The successful adoption of soil conservation measures by small-scale farmers is still very low (Morgan 1995, Ago and Kessler, 1996). The farmers are often blamed for this low success rate of soil conservation schemes. They are accused of being ignorant, uncooperative and conservative. In fewer of the cases extension workers are accused of not taking their task seriously, thereby failing to convince farmers of the benefits of soil and water conservation (Douglas, 1993). However, in the last few years experiences in soil and water conservation have shown that the problem is not with the farmers but the planning approaches of the soil conservation projects (Norman and Douglas, 1994; Shaxson et al., 1989). Most of the approaches are mainly top-down and outside experts usually exclude farmers from the planning process of the projects. As a result these projects often give recommendations for mitigating problems that are sometimes not perceived as immediate priorities by the farmers resulting in very low adoption rates. Successful soil and water conservation programs can only be achieved when farmers are actively involved in the planning process (Chambers, Pacey and Thrupp, 1989) and therefore different ways should be devised to stimulate and enhance their involvement and to improve the extension approaches. This paper presents the preliminary results of a study to test the value of SWOT analyses in mapping extension activities in soil conservation planning and particularly in the promotion of participatory diagnosis of problems, potential and priorities of small-holder farming systems to enable the development of strategies with higher adoption rates.


121

SWOT analysis as an instrument for collective decision-making. SWOT is an acronym for strengths (S), weaknesses (W), opportunities (O) and threats (T) and SWOT analysis is a method of systematic group reflection meant to gather, analyse, and evaluate information (about the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) and identify strategic options for a project, community or organization at a given time (Purohit, 2002). It is a tool designed to be used in the preliminary stages of decision-making and as a precursor to strategic planning in various kinds of applications. It has been a useful tool to industry in making important decisions in the development of business strategies (Balamuralikrishna and Dugger, 1995; Bartol and Martin, 1991) for many years. But its application in other fields has not been widespread despite the many possible benefits it can yield.

However, although SWOT analyses may be helpful in bringing to light important issues which need to be addressed and the respective strategic options, it is often not possible to attend to all the existing issues at once as a result of resource constraints. Hence, there is need of a collective evaluation of the relative importance of each weakness, strength, opportunity and threat to prioritise actions. This can be achieved through the use of different prioritisation and preference ranking techniques (Conway et al,1988, Scoones, 1998) to end up with most appropriate options.

Materials and Methods

The study involved 12 out of the 16 households of the Las Piedras a smallholder farming community, situated about 25 km south-east of the city of Havana, Cuba community over a period of one year during the 2000-2001 agricultural season. Almost all the adult population, both male and female, took part and participation in the activities was voluntary. Female participants constituted 41% while the rest were male. The SWOT analysis was carried out through several small focus group discussions. The groups were maintained small, about nine to twelve people to enable the participation of everyone in the exercise. Attempts were made during the activities to go beyond the professional–client relationship with the participants to facilitate the farmers to become comfortable to make suggestions and express their opinions. In the initial meetings the researchers explained the objectives of the proposed work and the possible mode of operations emphasizing that the major theme was to improve the farmers’ ability to help themselves.

The meetings included the gathering of baseline data for a preliminary analysis of the socio-cultural and agroecological situation as a basis for pre-partnership dialogue (Chech, 1986) with the community. Also semi-structured interviews and group transect walks helped to collect more information on the characteristics of the farming systems such as crops grown, those they aspire to grow in future, inputs, farming practices, family size, indigenous knowledge of conservation techniques and others. Also, the farmers had the opportunity to explain from their own perspective what were the weaknesses and strengths of their farming systems which make the problems of soil erosion persist in a problem census session (Jiggins and de Zeeuw, 1992) and how they thought this could be solved. The results of the analyses were then evaluated and prioritised in groups sessions with the farmers using ranking techniques.


122

Research Findings Characteristics of the Farming Households. Farm households studied have an average of 5 members and their agricultural land range between 1 to 5 ha. All the farmers studied were literate. They possessed on average a pair of oxen or 4 head of cattle. Ox-drawn ploughs are generally used for tillage. The major agricultural crops include cassava, legumes, maize, sweet potato, bananas and plantains, variety of vegetables and partly fruits like guava, and papaws for local consumption and sale to the neighbouring urban centres. The farmers studied can be taken as one recommendation domain (Conroy and Sutherland, 2004; Trip, 1986) considering their resource base and household characteristics.

Outcomes of the SWOT Analysis. The farmers with the assistance of the researchers as facilitators managed to identify five major strengths, five weaknesses, two opportunities and three threats to their farming systems with regard to the issue of soil erosion which are presented in the SWOT table (table 1). The table 2 shows the results of the evaluation of the relative importance of the observed strengths in a scale from low to very high. It is evident from the that a high level of awareness by the farmers about soil loss from their fields and the existence of indigenous knowledge on soil management were rated the most important strengths of the farming house holds when it comes to the resolution of the existing soil conservation challenges. This can be explained by the fact that a high level of awareness if harnessed effectively can be useful in tapping the existing indigenous knowledge on soil management in the solution of the local soil erosion problems. Makoha et al. (1999), van Dissel and de Graaff (1998) and Ervin and Ervin (1982) revealed the importance of farmers' awareness and perception of the soil erosion processes in adoption of soil conservation strategies. The level of literacy of the community was rated as the least important factor.

Table 3 presents the evaluation of the weaknesses identified by the farmers according to their importance in influencing the solution of the soil erosion challenges of the community and the intensity of their manifestation. The major weaknesses that needed urgent attention from the analysis were found to be; tillage in the direction of the slopes and that most agricultural land in the area is sloping and undulating. The farmers rated the limited use of cover crops and the inadequacy of the extension system to be important weakness although their intensity as problems was assessed as medium.

The assessment of opportunities (table 4) revealed that the existence of a national policy framework to promote sustainable land husbandry (National Program for Land Husbandry and Conservation) which outlines the national priorities of soil conservation, allocates relevant resources and strives to improve coordination of the major efforts in solving the major soil degradation problems of the country was the best opportunity to solve the soil erosion challenges in the area. It is important note that many countries in the developing world lack such a coordinated policy framework let alone the resources to tackle the existing soil degradation problems. Therefore, there is need find ways to tape the possibilities provided for in the policy to attend to the existing soil erosion challenges. The growing promotion of ecological land husbandry practices in the country was considered an average opportunity for the community in question.


123

With reference to the threats (table 5) it was observed that the major factor which may militate against the efforts to promote good land husbandry practices in the area is the not-so-good success record of past soil conservation projects in the region. After the participatory diagnosis of the farming system through the SWOT analysis the next stage used the results obtained to guide the problem-solution. Given below are some of the strategies identified by the farmers and the facilitators from the SWOT analysis which can enable extension service providers to refocus their work and identify options for the solution of the existing soil conservation challenges.

Strategies that Use Strengths to Tackle the Weaknesses Identified. (S-W Strategies)

• Awareness by the farmers of the excessive soil loss from the fields and the need to take measures against it should be capitalized on, to persuade them to adopt improved land husbandry practices based on a combination of existing but isolated indigenous knowledge and new techniques.

• Existence of good relations and cooperation among farmers in the community should be exploited to multiply the isolated good soil and crop management practices currently being used by some farmers through farmer-to-farmer knowledge transfer.

Strategies that Use Strengths to Capitalize on the Existing Opportunities (S-O Strategies)

• Existence of good relations and communication channels amongst the farmers and with communities in neighbouring areas should be used to facilitate diffusion of the information on the success of some ecological land husbandry and cropping practices by similar farmers elsewhere in the country. This may enhance the capacity and willingness to test these good practices.

Strategies that Minimize the Influence of Weaknesses Identified by Taking Advantage of

Existing Opportunities. (W-O Strategies)

• Local extension agents should exploit effectively the guidance and resources available through the National Program for Land Husbandry and Conservation to effectively address the soil erosion challenges of the communities studied.

Strategies that Enhance the Existing Strengths Taking Advantage of the Opportunities.

(S-O Strategies)

• As the farmers are already aware of the excessive soil loss from their fields and are keen to take measures against it, then local leadership can strengthen this desire to take action by making available information about the widespread promotion and growing acceptance of low cost ecological land husbandry and agricultural practices in most parts of the country.

Discussion and Conclusion.

It can be concluded from the study that a SWOT analysis can be useful in mapping and refocusing extension work and in generating a framework of actions that can lead to the identification of more specific strategic options to resolve the existing problems. As strategies


124

to attend to the existing challenges in the community would have been developed with the farmer, SWOT analyses could prove to be useful in building the farmers' confidence in solving their own problems, tapping their potential for innovation and initiative which can promote adoption of the resultant strategies. There is widespread agreement amongst researchers (Apantaku, Oloruntoba and Fakoya, 2003; Hudson and Cheatle 1993; Chambers, Pacey and Thrupp 1989) that there is need to promote farmer participation in the whole process of identification and development of the necessary technological options so that these take into account the farmers’ views, constraints and priorities to avoid ending up giving recommendations for mitigating problems that are not perceived by the farmers as immediate priorities (Jiggins1989).

SWOT analyses can be vehicles for collective decision-making in planning and implementing soil conservation programmes. In this study farmers were able to identify the major problems related to soil erosion on their farms and defined priorities for their solution taking into account the intricate relations between different factors. Such a type of analysis leads to technological solutions developed with the farmer not for the farmer as conventionally used to be done in past. The current study believes SWOT analyses can be a useful precursor and an instrument in participatory technology development from a realistic understanding of the existing problems, available resources, opportunities and any potential obstacles in the process. However, SWOT analyses should be used cautiously as they can be misleading if all participants are not given enough chances to contribute to deliberations. Also SWOT analyses may serve to confirm pre-conceived ideas if certain members of the group are left to dominate the proceedings. As a limitation the study noted that participatory planning through the method explained is a lengthy process needing patience from all the participants.

The first stage of the research was to test the value of SWOT analyses in mapping extension activities in participatory soil conservation planning. The next stage shall be testing the usefulness of SWOT analysis in developing of specific soil conservation technologies by farmers and subsequent improvement of their adoption rates. At this stage the study recommends that more research be done to widen the empirical base for the evaluation of the usefulness of SWOT analyses in agriculture and natural resource management specifically to improve the process of technology development and transfer in resources poor communities.

References Ago H. y A. Kessler, (1996) El enfoque de planificación participativa para enfrentar la

degradación de tierras en América Latina. http://rlc.fao.org/redes/redlach/bol3.htm.12/21/2000.

Apantaku S.O, A. Oloruntoba and E.O. Fakoya, (2003) Farmers’ participation in agricultural problems identification and prioritisation in Ogun State, Nigeria. In South African Journal of Agricultural Extension. Vol 2. 2003. p. 45-59.

Balamuralikrishna R. and J. C. Dugger. (1995) Swot analysis: a management tool for initiating new programs in vocational schools, in: Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, 12 (1)

Bartol, K. M., and Martin, D. C. (1991). Management. New York: McGraw Hill, Inc. Chambers, R., A. Pacey and L.A. Thrupp. (1989). Farmers First. Intermediate Technology

Publications, London.


125

Conroy C. and A. Sutherland (2004) Participatory Technology Development with Resource Poor Farmers: Maximizing impact through the use of Recommendation Domains. AgriculturalResearch and Extension Network Paper.

Douglas, M.G. 1993. Making conservation farmer-friendly. p. 4-15 in N.W. Hudson and R.J. Cheatle (eds.) Working with farmers for better land husbandry. Soil and Water Conservation Society, Ankeny, Iowa.

Ervin, C. A. and Ervin .E. D. (1982). Factors affecting the use of soil conservation practices: Hypotheses, evidence, and policy implications. Land Economics 58 (3): 277-292

FAO (2000) Manual de Prácticas Integradas de Manejo y Conservación de Suelos. Boletín de Tierras y Agua de la FAO. No. 8.

Hudson, N. and R.J. Cheatle (eds) (1993) Working with Farmers for Better Land Husbandry. Intermediate Technology Publications. London.

Instituto de Suelos (2001) Programa Nacional de Mejoramiento y Coservacion de Suelos. Agroinfor. La Habana.

Jiggins, J and H. de Zeeuw (1992), Participatory technology development in practice: Processes and methods In: C. Reijntjes, B. Haverkort and A. Waters-Bayer (1992), Farming for the Future: an introduction to low-external-input and sustainable agriculture. ETC/Macmillan. Leusden/London p.135-162.

Jiggins, J. (1989) Farmer participatory research and technology development. Occasional Papers in Rural Extension. No. 5. Ontario, Canada:University of Guelph

Makoha, M., Odera, H., Maritim, I. I. K., Okalebe, J. R. and Iruria, D, M (1999). Farmers' perceptions and adoption of soil management technologies in Western Kenya. African Crop Science Journal 7 (4): 549-58.

Morgan, R.P.C. (1995). Soil erosion and conservation. 2nd ed. Longman, Harlow, England. Norman, D and M, Douglas. (1994) Farming Systems Development and Soil Conservation.

Rome.173p. Purohit, M,.L. (2002). SWOT Analysis of Watershed Management Programme in: M.A.Khan

(ed). Watershed Management for Sustainable Agriculture. Agrobios. India. 213-220p. Sanders, T.F. (1988) Soil and Water Conservation of steep lands; a summary of Workshop

Discussions; In Moldenhauer, W.C and N Hudson, (Eds) Conservation Farming on Steep Lands. Ankey. Iowa. 275-282p

Shaxson, T.E. N.W. Hudson, D.W. Sanders, E. Roose and W.C. Moldernhauer (1989) Land Husbandry; a framework of Soil and Water and Conservation. Soil and Water Conservation Society. World Association of Soil and Water Conservation. Ankey. Iowa. 275-282 p.

Thompson A.A and A.J. Strictland, (2003) Strategic Management. Concepts and Cases. Thirteenth Edition. Tata MCgRAWL-Hill. New York.

Tripp, R. (1986) Some common sense about recommendation domains Farming Systems Support Project Newsletter, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1986.

van Dissel, S. C. and J. de Graaff (1998) Differences between farmers and scientists in the perception of soil erosion: a South African case study. Indigenous Knowledge Monitor, 6(3).


126

Effective Partnerships for Sustainable Rural Livelihoods:

A Critical Review and a Way Forward

Robert E. Mazur, Dorothy M. Masinde, Lorna Michael Butler

Center for Sustainable Rural Livelihoods, Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 50011-1050 USA

Abstract Partnerships between non-governmental organizations (NGOs) - Northern and Southern - and community based organizations (CBOs) can have important roles in promoting sustainable rural livelihoods (SRL). Key SRL components are sustainable agriculture, natural resource management, income earning and strengthening local capabilities. Since the potential of these partnerships is often not fully realized, a critical review of the literature on empowerment, participatory development, capability strengthening, and partnerships will provide the basis for improved understanding of reasons for current shortcomings and elements necessary in partnerships that effectively contribute to sustainable rural livelihoods.

Introduction We have two principal goals in writing this paper. The first is to problematise conventional views regarding the nature of ‘partnership’ relations in development assistance writ large, with a specific focus on those involving NGOs and CBOs. This is intended to force us out of the ‘comfort zone’ in which it is assumed that ‘partnership’ per se is beneficial both in terms of process and outcomes because it is based on ‘good intentions.’ The second goal is to sketch the nature of roles in partnerships that genuinely promote sustainable livelihoods in rural areas of developing countries. In the process of articulating the problematic nature of existing partnerships, some noteworthy questions and issues emerge. While ‘systems thinking’ is increasingly being touted as a means to successful development, how effectively have we shifted from linear planning for predetermined outcomes to understanding and facilitating change in complex systems? In recognizing that development processes are unpredictable and fluid, Hinton (2004:219) questions how adequately are we able to devise appropriately flexible and adaptive procedures. In response to both of these concerns, awareness is rapidly growing that blueprint planning implementation approaches can not achieve viable and sustainable outcomes. The technical complexity and social embeddedness of issues require the active collaboration of public authorities, private business, scientific experts, user groups and social interest groups, non-governmental organizations and representatives of stakeholders in the particular ecological domain (Bouwen & Taillieu 2004:137). To the extent that a focus on ‘farming systems’ per se leads to a view of political dimensions of development as important but largely exogenous, how can we forge ways to broaden the framework so that they are explicitly linked? Does our manner of providing development ‘assistance’ (including technical assistance and applied research) respect fundamental human needs for autonomy, and enable people to fully exercise their capabilities for deliberation and


127

action, as Harvey & Lind (2005:5) challenge us to do? Inequalities in power tend to exclude many people from essential governance processes, undermining transparency, accountability, trust and ‘ownership’ (Chambers & Pettit 2004:140) and, by implication – sustainability of any initial positive outcomes achieved. From one perspective, a gradual shift in development discourse has been occurring from emphasizing projects and service delivery to utilizing the language of rights and governance. Such a shift requires a better understanding of complex systems in which development processes are embedded, as noted above (Hinton & Groves 2004:5). Yet from another perspective, there has been little explicit - or even implicit - transformation of our approaches to using the sustainable livelihoods frameworks in practice. Even less common is prioritization of ‘rights based’ approaches to development - particularly if a high standard of democracy is maintained for governance. Critics argue that the new development approaches tend to “recycle colonial discourses and stereotypes” (Baaz 2005:97). Empowerment and Participatory Development We conceive of empowerment as the processes through which people genuinely become agents of their own development. We underscore the assertion by Chambers & Pettit (2004:158) that it is those currently with little power whose agency is most vital in promoting sustainable development. Empowerment is achieved through political action; power can not be ‘given’ to a ‘beneficiary’ (Hildyard et al. 2001:70). The approach to empowerment that is adopted in practice is shaped by the way that power is conceptualized. A ‘zero sum’ view of power as existing in a fixed quantity in society means that the marginalized achieve empowerment by diminishing the power of those in control or favored by current arrangements. A ‘non-zero sum’ view of power as variable, or expandable, means that gains through empowerment by marginalized people do not necessarily result in absolute decline in the power of those currently having disproportionate control (Mayo & Craig 1995:5). The practice of participation that prevails in results-oriented and time-bound development projects deviates markedly from its origins in radical politics. The prevailing utilitarian orthodoxy views participation as a depoliticized technical method or ‘procedure’ to better achieve results (Hickey & Mohan 2004:11). The original idea of participation in development was as a political process of empowerment, contesting domination and broadening and deepening democracy. A spectrum of ideologically charged political movements critiqued biases in the practice of contemporary international development, which they viewed as an oppressive and unequal set of ‘top-down’ relations. “The Freirian concept of ‘conscientization,’ calling for raising the self-reflected awareness of the people rather than educating or indoctrinating them, for giving them the power to assert their ‘voice’ and for stimulating their self-driven collective action to transform their reality, influenced the philosophical vision of many grassroots programmes” (Rahman 1995:25). Grassroots activists, social movements, academics and intellectuals have together contributed to the demand for direct democracy and self-determination - local people’s ‘participation’ in development planning and decision-making (Chhotray 2004:327-328). Shared decision-making implies that interested parties not only are intimately involved in planning, but also become collectively responsible for the outcomes (Bouwen & Taillieu 2004:138). Creating a meaningful social or economic organization of the poor is fundamentally a


128

political act. By forming organizations, poor individuals gain access to the collective information, skills, knowledge and experience of other members, as well as to the power and social capital that the combined numbers of members and their assets represent (Crowley et al. 2005:37). Members also need to derive benefits from participation. These usually take the form of improved livelihoods, empowerment, capacity building to run their own organization, access to productive or financial capital, or increased influence, negotiation power, and links to other organizations. In societies undergoing governmental decentralization, development issues are framed by the changing dynamics between civil society and private and public sector actors. There are tremendous opportunities and challenges to ensure that farmers’ interests are adequately represented in local and national decision-making forums, and for improved access to services. These are increasingly dependent upon networked relationships among donor agencies, non-governmental organizations, private firms, government offices, and local community and agricultural groups at local, regional and national levels (Bingen 2004:31). An example of decentralized decision-making structures in India is illustrative of the complexities involved:

“The programme is implemented through village level development projects. In the new structure, the district programme body has the freedom to initiate project implementation procedures within the district. In the Kurnool District Watershed Office (KWO), the administrative head of the programme is the Project Officer, who works along with a Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) to advise on technical matters, and a team of Project Implementing Agencies (PIAs), consisting either of government officers or NGOs, for individual microwatershed projects. PIAs are assisted in implementation by a four member interdisciplinary Watershed Development Team (WDT). WDT members work exclusively and full-time on projects entrusted to them, constituting the ‘face’ of the project and operating in close proximity to the villagers. The WDT is also responsible for organizing project paper-work required by the senior management at KWO. Its position, however, is at the lowest end of the project administrative hierarchy; it can be removed by the PIA, or at the behest of senior offices in KWO” (Chhotray 2004:333).

Further contradictions in the development aid context are revealed by the pressures on development agencies and staff members to show results and demonstrate that their efforts ‘make a difference.’ This preoccupation undermines their advisory roles as team members in a ‘partner’ organization, resulting in actions more consistent with the role of manager or director (Baaz 2005:106-107). The resulting approach compromises the empowerment potential of genuine participation, as noted in a case in India:

“Local staff members are acutely aware that these projects are time-bound. This drives them hard to secure the active support of dominant individuals so that the project can be initiated and then legitimized. It becomes imperative on their part to ensure a semblance of agreement among the dominant village interests. There is always the fear of losing their jobs in the event of unsatisfactory performance. Conversely, the inauthentic and formalistic modes of participation and decision-making in major areas of the watershed projects neither deters nor disarms the dominant interests from


129

playing their traditional role of deciding for the entire community. Although the watershed project is supposed to offer a ‘new’ institution, as opposed to the traditional panchayat, and a ‘new’ mode of participatory development, the old power structures manage to retain control under cover of cosmetic changes” (Chhotray 2004:349).

Thus, it is not possible to achieve genuine participation through an emphasis on rapid achievement of consensus and technical targets while ignoring patterns of local power and domination. A distinctly different mode of operation is required. Moreover, an obvious limitation of participatory development is that focusing only on ‘local’ structures overlooks wider structures of political oppression and injustice (Hickey & Mohan 2004:11). We are thus faced with the need to understand how projects can be designed in a way that promotes conscientization, collective intellectual capability to investigate and analyze relevant conditions and genuine collective decision-making, combined with inclusive design and effective implementation of a project. Systematic strengthening of capabilities of indigenous local organizations and their broader regional or national associations seems essential. Capability Strengthening Sustainable rural development is contingent on local development organizations (NGOs and CBOs) being able to operate as learning organizations engaged in systems thinking (conceptualizing in terms of the ‘whole,’ key interrelationships, and feedback loops), and gain skills in knowledge creation and application. A movement know as participatory action research is spreading, one that seeks to stimulate and assist disadvantaged people to undertake their own collective investigations into their living conditions and environment. Then people can create their own ‘science’ and thus, be empowered to negotiate with other sectors of society (Rahman 1995:24-25). Cycles of learning and action (reframing the problem, action, experience, processes of questioning and reflection) can promote meaningful learning (systemic sense-making) (Pasteur & Scott-Villiers 2004:183). Insights gained through learning processes can contribute to adaptive changes, increased access to skills, technology and other resources, and to improved future action and performance, thereby adding value to the organization and its activities. Civic innovation involves mobilization and action for problem solving through experimenting with new approaches, learning from one’s own experience and the experiences and best practices of others (Fowler 2000:650). Learning how to learn from experience requires designing programs and projects explicitly to facilitate learning, by identifying and building on existing and emerging opportunities for learning. Such capability strengthening and learning-by-doing also builds members’ ownership of their organizations and helps them to retain a pro-poor focus, even in the face of pressure from other institutions and the wider social and political context. The important point is that this capability strengthening serves a dual purpose: it builds the skills and self-esteem of the individuals involved and it improves the effectiveness and sustainability of the organization as a whole (Crowley et al. 2005:36). Assessing the impacts of organizational capacity building, which is characterized by intrinsically complex, intangible and often ill-defined processes, is particularly complicated. Impact assessment should be seen as an investment that can add value to the organization’s ability to learn, rather than just an additional cost (Hailey et al. 2005). Innovative impact


130

assessment approaches must address the challenges of: � involving a high level of participation by local communities and incorporating their stories and experiences � recognizing and responding to the needs and agendas of different stakeholders � measuring what is important, not merely what is easy � capturing and assessing the systemic, multi-dimensional and dynamic nature of organizational change � balancing ‘core’ principles such as trust, equality, ownership, reliability, credibility and legitimacy, with flexibility to adapt to differing contexts

For monitoring and evaluation, this means placing less emphasis on performance indicators and more on participatory methods of assessing locally-led processes of social change (Brehm 2004a:26). It is also difficult to measure impacts of capability strengthening in the short-term (because it yields primarily longer-term benefits). This, in turn, should increase the local ‘voice’ in the emerging development agenda. One key indicator of empowerment is when an individual or community is sufficiently self-confident to say ‘no’ to organizations or activities that do not meet their own criteria for ‘development’ (Mohan 2001:167). Partnership With the shift in terminology from ‘donors’ and ‘beneficiaries’ to ‘partners,’ has there been real, substantive change in practice? For Northern organizations, effective partnership typically means clarity about the purpose of the relationship and the quality of the work carried out. This results-oriented definition contrasts with Southern organizations’ perspectives, where an effective partnership often refers to the quality of the relationship itself rather than the work (Brehm 2004b:160); particularly valued are the long-term nature, continuity and stability. Adopting the terminology of ‘partners’ does not necessarily imply a reversal of the economic conditions characterizing the aid relationship (Baaz 2005:75). Given that power distortions arising from the transfer of resources can undermine mutuality, this means that partnerships need to compensate by respecting non-monetary contributions, especially the knowledge and expertise of the Southern partners (Brehm 2004a:22). Fundamentally, we must expand our own skills and expertise to become highly proficient in supporting the efforts of others, our partners. Adding value to a local organization’s or community’s efforts is the essence of being considered a genuine partner. Supporting a partner’s institutional capacity building processes increases the probability of sustainability (of it as an organization and of their ability to engage in sustainable activities). An important aspect of capability strengthening aims at long-term organizational sustainability through training in grant writing, fundraising, and other tools, structures, and practices necessary to ensure a secure financial footing (Hoksbergen 2005:18). Those working in development organizations need to become better learners, as organizations (per above) and in partnership. They need to have an organizational attitude that values and strengthens local knowledge and leadership and values civil society as well as technical- and human-services results. Relationships among partners are not just about money, but can remain strong even when there is no longer external funding (Eyben 2004:19). The is significant need to develop post-funding and non-funding based partnerships, particularly in relation to policy dialogue and advocacy. The key activity here is to find and back individuals and organizations that are capable of providing systemic solutions to social problems that reach far beyond the one case or location (Fowler 2000:651).


131

Norwegian Church Aid (NCA) aims to strengthen civil society and explicitly emphasizes capacity building with its Brazilian partners. While NCA primarily received funding from the Norwegian government, it also also raised funds for Brazil through public campaigns. Thus, NCA was able to develop long-term relations with its partners and has taken on an enabling role. Its Brazilian partners feel that their relationships have has enhanced their autonomy - specifically by encouraging the diversification of income. Technical inputs and evaluation have also greatly contributed to their development. Nevertheless, there is a strong desire for deeper dialogue and greater transparency in relation to decision making (Brehm 2004b:163). Development partnerships should ultimately be accountable to the grass-roots organizations and members of the community (Brehm 2004a:22). Given the difficulty – if not impossibility of measuring distinct impacts of partners and of partnerships per se, a different emphasis is elicited. The new policy environment demands that donors change roles from managing development projects and programs to becoming responsible and self-aware co-players in broader political processes (Hinton & Groves 2004:13). As stated so well by Eyben (2004:15), development agencies need to understanding themselves, not as the directors, sitting ‘back stage’ but as among of the actors on the stage in a script not yet written, consisting of responsible and self-aware co-players in broader political processes. References Baaz, Maria Eriksson. 2005. The Paternalism of Partnership. London: Zed Books. Bingen, Jim. 2004. “A Comparative Review of Multi-Stakeholder Arrangements for

Representing Farmers in Agricultural Development Programmes and Policy-making in Sub-Saharan Africa” Rome: FAO, Social Development Department. http://www.fao.org/sd/dim_in3/in3_040501_en.htm

Brehm, Vicky Mancuso. 2004a. “Partnership as a Contested Concept.” Pp. 17-28 in Vicky Mancuso Brehm, Autonomy or Dependence? Case Studies of North-South NGO Partnerships. Oxford: INTRAC.2004b. “Comparison and Conclusion.” Pp. 153-168 in Vicky Mancuso Brehm, Autonomy or Dependence? Case Studies of North-South NGO Partnerships. Oxford: INTRAC.

Bouwen, Rene & Tharsi Taillieu. 2004. “Multi-Party Collaboration as Social Learning for Interdependence: Developing Relational Knowing for Sustainable Natural Resource Management.” Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 14(3):137-153.

Chambers, Robert & Jethro Pettit. 2004. “Shifting Power to Make a Difference.” Pp. 137-162 in Leslie Grove & Rachel Hinton (eds.), Inclusive Aid: Changing Power and Relationships in International Development. London: Earthscan, 2004.

Chhotray, Vasudha. 2004. “The Negation of Politics in Participatory Development Projects, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh.” Development and Change 35(2):327-352.

Crowley, E., et al. 2005. “Organizations of the Poor: Conditions for Success.” Ahmedabad, India:FAO,Rural Development Division. http://www.fao.org/sd/dim_in3/in3_050901_en.htm

Eyben, Rosalind. 2004. “Relationships Matter for Supporting Change in Favour of Poor People.” Lessons for Change in Policy & Organizations, No. 8. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.

Fowler, Alan. 2000. “NGDOs as a Moment in History: Beyond Aid to Social Entrepreneurship or Civic Innovation?” Third World Quarterly 21(4):637-654.


132

Hailey, John, Rick James & Rebecca Wrigley. 2005. “Rising to the Challenges: Assessing the Impacts of Organizational Capacity Building.” Praxis Paper No. 2. Oxford: INTRAC. http://www.intrac.org/pages/PraxisPaper2.html

Harvey, Paul & Jeremy Lind. 2005. “Dependency and Humanitarian Relief: a Critical Analysis.” Humanitarian Policy Group 19. London: Overseas Development Institute.

Hickey, Samuel & Giles Mohan. 2004. “Towards Participation as Transformation: Critical Themes and Challenges.” Pp. 3-24 in Samuel Hickey & Giles Mohan (eds.), Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation? London: Zed Books.

Hildyard, Nicholas, et al. 2001. “Pluralism, Participation and Power: Joint Forest Management in India.” Pp. 56-71 in Bill Cooke & Uma Kothari (eds.), Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books.

Hinton, Rachel. 2004. “Enabling Inclusive Aid: Changing Power and Relationships in International Development.” Pp. 210-220 in Leslie Grove & Rachel Hinton (eds.), Inclusive Aid: Changing Power and Relationships in International Development. London: Earthscan.

Hinton, Rachel & Leslie Groves. 2004. “The Complexity of Inclusive Aid.” Pp. 3-20 in Leslie Grove & Rachel Hinton (eds.), Inclusive Aid: Changing Power and Relationships in International Development. London: Earthscan, 2004.

Hoksbergen, Roland. 2005. “Building Civil Society through Partnership: Lessons from a Case Study of the Christian Reformed World Relief Committee.” Development in Practice. 15(1):16-27.

Mayo, Marjorie & Gary Craig. 1995. “Community Participation and Empowerment: the Human Face of Structural Adjustment or Tools for Democratic Transformation?” Pp. 1-11 in Gary Craig & Marjorie Mayo (eds.), Community Empowerment: a Reader in Participation and Development. London: Zed Books.

Mohan, Giles. 2001. “Beyond Participation: Strategies for Deeper Empowerment.” Pp. 153-167 in Bill Cooke & Uma Kothari (eds.), Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books.

Pasteur, Katherine & Patta Scott-Villiers. 2004. “Minding the Gap through Organizational Learning.” Pp. 181-198 in Leslie Grove & Rachel Hinton (eds.), Inclusive Aid: Changing Power and Relationships in International Development. London: Earthscan.

Rahman, Muhammad Anisur. 1995. “Participatory Development: Toward Liberation or Co-Optation?” Pp. 24-32 in Gary Craig & Marjorie Mayo (eds.), Community Empowerment: a Reader in Participation and Development. London: Zed Books.


133

Productivity Increase through Crop Diversification in Plantation Crops

M. A. Hamid Miah, M. A. Samad Talukdar , M. A. Ali, R. Ali, M. A. Quyum, and B. Karmakar

International Rice Research Institute Bangladesh, Bangladesh Sericulture Research and Training Institute

Abstract Mulberry (Morus alba) is a perennial crop used for feeding silkworm. In Bangladesh no other crop is grown in the space between rows of mulberry plants. It was possible to grow 2 tons/ha of Boro paddy (irrigated rice grown during December-April) in 2003. Paddy production in Aman season (June–November period) in 2003 was 4.8 tons/ha. Data were collected on leaf yield, leaf weight, sugar, protein, average cocoon weight, filament length, and average denier from sole mulberry crop and from this trial. Leaf yield of mulberry increased by 31 % in both Aman and Boro season. Filament of silk increased by 26 % in Boro and 2.7% in Aman season. There was no significant variation on other parameters. After harvesting Aman paddy, winter crops such as wheat, garlic mustard, chickpea and mungbean were cultivated producing 4.14 , 6.1, 1.2, 0.65 and 0.9 ton/ha . More healthy leaves were produced from the treated plots. The findings convinced Bangladesh Silk Foundation to practice the system in its commercial farm this year towards large scale adoption.

Introduction

Mulberry (Morus alba ) is mainly cultivated for rearing silkworm (Bombyx mori L.) that helps in increasing family income and livelihood for small and medium farmers including land less people. Bangladesh Sericulture Board (BSB) with its full efforts started sericulture extension first under Switch Bangladesh bilateral Program and reached a target of about 8000 hectares including roadside plantation. But after 1995, domestic silk could not compete with the imported silk in respect of price and quality. Technology in silk industry has not been developed as in other silk producing countries like, China, India, Thailand and Vietnam. Therefore, domestic silk gradually lost its market due to weakness in competition with imported silk. As a consequence, sericulture industries faced loss which directly affected the silk farmers in Bangladesh. Moreover, there was no technology for increasing productivity of land keeping mulberry in place. So many mulberry farms were replaced by other crops like mango, vegetables, rice, wheat, pulses etc. Some poor or landless farmers started growing mulberry mainly on the roadside, pond side, alongside railway, etc. with minimum or without management leading to poor quality of leaves. Sole crop of mulberry was not considered by farmers as a profitable proposition. Road side plantation covered 2200 ha in the year 2001 which reduced to 2000 ha in 2004.Bush plantation in plain land managed by several NGOs and public sector organizations covers only 500 ha at present (Personal contact with Bangladesh Silk Foundation). Thus total area under mulberry cultivation has come down to 2500 ha compared to 8000 ha before 1995.Bangladesh Sericulture Research and Training Institute (BSRTI), Rajshahi has been working in this promising area in order to develop technologies on sericulture except on increasing total productivity of farms keeping mulberry on place. Realizing the key limitations of mulberry popularization through increasing total factor productivity of the land, a collaborative research program was taken up in the experimental


134

field of Bangladesh Sericulture Research Institute, Rajshahi. The partners were Bangladesh office of International Rice Research Institute, Bangladesh Sericulture Research and Training Institute, and Bangladesh Rice Research Institute. The purpose was to explore the possibility of using inter- row spaces in the mulberry plantation through cultivation of several field crops in sequence leading to increasing productivity of the land and income of sericulture farmers.

Field and crop management procedures: Modification of mulberry orchard: The exploratory work was started in the experimental farm of Bangladesh Sericulture Research Institute Rajshahi. An old mulberry orchard having the variety BM-4 planted in 1.0 m x 1.0 m (plant to plant and row to row) spacing was adjusted to 1.6 m width x 27 m length per strip and there were 24 strips and 9 rows were undisturbed as planted. This adjusted spacing facilitated operation of power tillers between mulberry rows (Plate 1 and 2). Rice cultivation: Rice was grown in Boro season (December-April) 2003-004 and in transplanted Aman season (July-November) 2004. In Boro season, three varieties of Boro rice viz. BRRI Dhan 28, BRRI Dhan 29 and BRRI Dhan 36 were grown under irrigated condition. In transplanted Aman season BRRI Dhan 39, WIATA4 and IR71700-247-1-1-2 were grown under rainfed condition. Each variety was grown randomly in 8 rows. Fertilizers recommended for Aman and Boro paddy was applied. Thirty-day-old seedlings were transplanted in 20 cm x 20 cm spacing using 3-5 seedlings per hill. Yield index was taken from 6 spots per row and each spot was 1 m x 1 m area and each row was considered as one replication. In the 2004-005 winter season wheat and garlic were grown under irrigated condition but chickpea and mustard were grown under rainfed situation. Wheat, garlic, chickpea and mustard were sown after harvesting Aman paddy. Wheat cultivation: Wheat variety Shatabdi was used following recommended seed rate and fertilizers. The crops were harvested upon maturity and yield data were taken as described for rice.

Garlic cultivation: Bulbs of a local variety of garlic were sown @ 500 kg/ha following the spacing 20 cm (row to row) x 10 cm (bulb let to bulb let). Fertilizers such as Urea: TSP: MP: Mustard cake were applied @ 200:125:100:150 kg/ha. Before final land preparation, powdered mustard cake 1/3rd urea and TSP were applied while remaining urea and MP were applied after 30 and 60 days after seeding (DAS) following mulching and weeding.

Chickpea cultivation: Chickpea was grown in 3-strips under rainfed condition. Cultivar BARI Cchola 5 was used. Before final land preparation primed seed of BARI Cchola 5 was broadcasted @ 50 kg/ha. Fertilizers such as Urea: TSP: MP: Boric acid were applied @ 40:80:30:10 kg/ha during seeding. The crops were harvested upon maturity and yield data was taken as described for rice.

Mustard cultivation:

Mustard was grown in 4-strips under rainfed condition. Cultivar BARI Sarisha 6 was used. Seeds of BARI Sarisha 6 were broadcasted @ 10 kg/ha. Fertilizers such as Urea: TSP: MP:


135

Gypsum: Boric acid were applied @ 200:150:70:120:10 kg/ha during seeding. The crops were harvested upon maturity and yield data was taken as described for rice.

Mungbean cultivation:

After harvest of wheat, garlic, mustard and chickpea the lands of all 24 strips were prepared by power tiller. Primed mungbean seed of cultivar BINA mug 5 was broadcasted @ 40 kg/ha before final land preparation. No fertilizer was applied. The crops were harvested by picking matured pod twice and yield data was taken as described for rice. Mulberry leaf harvest and cocoon rearing: Mulberry leaves were collected four times as per the schedule shown below: Season 1: (for chaita crop: 25th Dec.-5th Jan) , Season 2: (for jaistha crop: 25th March-5th April), Season 3: (for Bhaduri crop: 1st June-20th June) and Season 4: (for Agrahani crop: 1st Sep.-10th Sep). However, for combination and accommodation of other crops the dates of mulberry pruning were adjusted to some extent without affecting mulberry and silkworm rearing. Data were collected on leaf yield, leaf quality, branches and nodes of plants per meter, cocoon weight, filament length and shell weight with relevance to intercropping and sole mulberry plantation. The findings:

Rice:

Grain yield of Boro rice was very low compared to wet season Aman rice. In Boro season 2003-2004, the highest yield was recorded for BRRI Dhan 28 (2.51 t/ha) followed by BRRI Dhan 36 and BRRIdhan29 (Table 1). Poor performance of Boro rice in mulberry interspaces was perhaps due to shading effect by mulberry at reproductive stage of rice and insufficient moisture supply as the mulberry plantation was not established under irrigated condition, and winter months are dry in Bangladesh. Although the field was weekly irrigated but the moisture retention capacity of the soil was very low. Therefore, in the next Boro season, wheat, garlic, mustard and chickpea were cultivated instead of rice. However, the performance of Aman rice in wet season was excellent. In fact no statistical variation was seen among the varieties. Advance line IR71700-247-1-1-2 gave the highest yield followed by WAITA-4 and BRRI dhan 39 (Table 1). In this investigation it was observed that short duration rice varieties with shorter plant height are suitable for rice cultivation in mulberry interspaces. It was also observed that upon crop cultivation in mulberry interspaces, mulberry plant perhaps uptake some nutrients from applied fertilizer in crop cultivation which in consequence produced more and larger leaves compared to BSRTI- recommended practice. Crop cultivation also reduced tremendously the overall weed infestation in the orchard.

Wheat, Garlic, Mustard and Chickpea: Wheat was grown in 6 strips/row. In general, the growth and yield performance was excellent (Table 2). Mean yield was 4.14 t/ha (Table 2). Performance of garlic cultivation in mulberry interspaces was very good. Chickpea performance was poor due to poor germination. Grain yield of Mungbean was affected by


136

cropping pattern followed. After 2nd time pod harvest of mungbean the biomass yield ranged from 1.98 -2.9 t/ha.

Table1.* Performance of different rice varieties in Boro and T. Aman seasons in mulberry

interspaces, BSRTI farm Rajshahi, 2004-05.

Boro season T. Aman season

BRRIdhan28 BRRIdhan29 BRRIdhan36 WAITA-4 IR71700- BRRIdhan39

Yield (t/ha) 2.51 ±0.16 1.78 ± 0.3 2.34 ± 0.20 4.7± 0.2 4.8 ± 0.2 4.6 ± 0.2

Panicles/m2 189.7 ± 0.7 153.9 ± 12.8 184.3 ± 13.0 260±3.5 303±5.7 265±4.8

Sterility (%) 37.4 ± 2.3 51.9 ± 5.1 35.9 ± 1.5 15.3±2.8 17.8±2.1 14.8±3.1

Thousand grain wt. (g)

19.0±0.3 18.8±0.2 20.3±0.2 22.2±0.3 19.1±0.1 21.3±0.2

Growth duration (days)

145 166 147 145 125 122

Plant height (cm)

98 105 95 110 90 101

* Mean of 8 replications each and each rep consisted of the harvest of 6 m2 area

Leaf yield and branch characteristics: During the Boro and Aman season, leaf yield through the intercrop practices was 31 %higher than that in the conventional one which was influenced by number of nodes per meter and single leaf weight. Leaf quality in terms of sugar and protein was not affected, except that intercropped mulberry leaves had higher quantity of moisture (Table 3). Effect on silk and silkworms: In Boro season, average filament length of silk from intercropped land was 8 % lower than in the conventional plot. But in terms of denier, effect was just reverse. This indicates that weight of silkworm was more when fed from the leaves of intercropped fields. All these information indicate that when crops are grown in the spaces between mulberry rows, leaf production is more, health of silkworm is better, average denier is higher. Table 2. Yield of Aman rice, wheat, garlic, mustard and chickpea and mungbean grown in

mulberry interspaces, during winter season 2004-05 at BSRI farm Rajshahi.

Yield (t/ha)* Cropping pattern

Rice** Wheat Garlic Mustard Chickpea Mungbean

Rice-Chickpea-Mungbean

4.71

- - - 0.65±0.1

0.8±0.2

Rice-Mustard-Mungbean

4.71

- - 1.2±0.3

- 0.9±0.2

Rice-Wheat-Mungbean

4.71

4.14±0.4

- - - 0.96±0.2

Rice-Garlic-Mungbean

4.71

- 6.1±0.7 - - 0.94±0.2

* Mean of 8 replications each and each rep consisted of the harvest of 6 m2 area ** Grand mean of rice yield used

Profit of the exploratory intervention: The activity is an indicative one. The benefit of other crop is a real determining factor for such a combination of cropping as shown in the table 4. The table indicates that without


137

affecting mulberry and silkworm, a substantial amount of profit can be earned from the inter row spaces in the mulberry plantation. This space would, otherwise, have been left vacant or covered with weeds. Technology transfer: The indicative success encouraged Bangladesh Silk Foundation and Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee (BRAC), the oldest and biggest NGO in Bangladesh to take up a pilot production program in their experimental farm in a limited scale for further validation and refinement of the system towards large scale adoption.

Table-3: Leaf yield and its component characters

Season: 1 (Boro) Treatment Number of

branch/plant Number of the longest shoot (cm)

Nodes/meter shoot length

Single leaf weight (gm)

Leaf yield/ha

T1 (with intercrop)

13.93 1066.16 31.63 2.88 4892.42

T0 (without intercrop)

15.80 1074.40 28.80 2.46 3745.88

Season: 2 (Aman)

T1 (with intercrop)

15.66 575.10 32.88 5.13 2485.44

T0 (without intercrop)

14.33 438.33 32.67 4.11 1898.25

Table 4. Gross production and benefit of different intercrops grown in the inter row spaces

Crops Production (ton/ha)

Price per ton (Taka )

Total sales proceeds (Taka/ha)

Cost of Production (Taka /ha)

Gross profit (Taka/ha)

Rice 4.7 13,125 61,687 21,609 40,078

Wheat 4.14 7,500 31,050 16,431 14,619

Chick pea 0.65 30,000 19,500 5,000 14,500

Mustard 1.2 32,432 38,918 7,000 31,918

Garlic 6.1 45,000 1,23,525 4,000 1,19,525

Mungbean 0.9 40,000 36,000 10,000 26,000

01 US$= Taka 65.00

Important message and lessons learnt:

• Mechanization in mulberry plantation has been possible to reduce labour cost

• More crop and hence more income without reducing mulberry production

• Healthy plants, bigger leaves and more healthy silkworm through intercropping

• Less number of plants but more number of leaves in intercropping system

• Potential of growing rice, garlic, mustard, wheat, chickpea and mung bean explored.

• More crops as per Agroecosysem may be grown to increase total factor productivity than a sole mulberry crop leading to profit of growing mulberry for sericulture.


138

Impact: Bangladesh Silk Foundation has initiated a pilot study of this technique in its Bogra farm this year. BRAC, the biggest and oldest NGO in Bangladesh is also considering a pilot study in one of its farm this year. References: Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council. 2004. Fertilizer Recommendation Guide. Dhaka,

Bangladesh. 172 P. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics Year book 2003. Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (pers.comm.) Bangladesh Sericulture Research Institute Bangladesh Silk Foundation.


139

Productivity Enhancement and Welfare Gains on Smallholdings in South Western Kenya

Lutta Muhammad, Paul G.A. Omanga, Richard Apamo

National Dryland Research Centre, Catholic Relief Services and the Catholic Diocese of Homa Bay, Kenya

Abstract Low productivity and rampant poverty characterize the Gucha, Mogusi and Sondu river catchment areas. Largely semi-arid, rainfall is insufficient for fruit and vegetable crops, although demand for these commodities is rarely met. Soils are suitable for raising crops under irrigation, and there are many sources of water. Rain water harvesting for subsistence crops is feasible. Findings of a study conducted in the area with objectives of assessing the impact of small scale irrigation and construction of terraces and analyzing factors influencing this adoption are presented. Methodology involved a survey of 298 members of the Homa Bay Agriculture and Environment Program (HB-AEP) of the Catholic Diocese, using rapid appraisal techniques and group discussions. Data analysis involved extraction of descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Farmers adopted terracing first, raising grain production by 12%, then bucket irrigation. Mean length of terraces on crop land was 77 meters per farm. Two systems, (bucket and T-pump) were adopted by 22% for irrigating kitchen gardens and raised beds. Factors affecting adoption and impact were land tenure, micro finance, and extension methods. The micro-finance system allowed access to local and external capital, contributing to entrepreneurial acumen and household welfare. Policy should address the Village Bank development.

Introduction In South Western Kenya, high population growth rates have given rise to pressure on land, declining soil fertility, increased erosion, reduced bio-diversity and declining productivity. Problems associated with inadequate moisture supplies at critical crop growth stages and particularly so in semi arid environments which characterize much of the South Western Kenya (SWK) region can be mitigated through rainwater harvesting techniques by construction of water conservation structures or smallholder irrigation.. Terracing would prevent soil erosion and effect water harvesting. Micro-irrigation has where adopted, rewarded implementing farmers by allowing more flexibility. Moreover, policy measures such as reduction of controls on trade in farm inputs and farm produce (Nyoro 1996) and improved agricultural extension services through implementation of the National Extension Project (NEP 1 and 2) should have supported increased adoption of numerous of technologies for soil conservation, rainwater harvesting and micro-irrigation which were developed and evaluated widely by smallholders in the region. Yet yields remained low (Jaetzold and Schmidt 1982). This paper highlights some of the change and adaptation in farming systems that took place over a period of three years in South Western Kenya following institutional interventions by the Homa-Bay Agriculture and Environment Program and attempts to identify explanations for this change.


140

South Western Kenya The South Western Kenya area that is the subject of this paper covers the catchment area for the Gucha, Mogusi and Sondu rivers and extends over Homa Bay, Rachuonyo, Suba, Migori and Kuria administrative Districts. These rivers chart a south westerly course, draining into Lake Victoria. Thus the area is part of the greater Nile Basin. Most of the soils, however, are suitable for raising reasonable crops under irrigation, and there are many sources of water that can be used for such purposes such as surface run off, rivers, ponds and the lake. Average farm size is about 3.4 hectares. About half of this acreage is under crops. Infant mortality and prevalence of many diseases is high. Lack of appropriate farm tools, implements and other inputs, poor access to markets, contribute to food shortages, and low income. Demand for vegetables by the expanding rural and urban market in the area is rarely met. In consequence, diets of members of rural households are generally deficient in vitamins and minerals and for this reason, skin diseases are common especially among the fishing and pastoral communities. Many factors have been identified, chief of which are lack of appropriate grass-roots level institutions which can foster and promote adoption of improved farming techniques, financial resources needed to support adoption. One of the results of the public policy reforms of the Government of Kenya of 1986-96 was reduced participation in the provision of services on the one hand, while on the other hand, the role of the NGOs as service providers increased. The Agriculture and Environment Program of the Catholic Diocese of Homa Bay (AEP-HB) interventions included mobilization of farmers into groups, construction of soil conservation structures, the bucket and T-pump technologies for irrigation. By August 2000, groups affiliated to HB-AEP had recruited 3662 individual members. The HB-AEP sponsored savings and credit scheme provided opportunities for mobilization of available local financial resources through a flexible and accessible savings facility, this flexibility seemed to extend to the purposes for which the loan proceeds can be used. Procedures and Methods Field methodology involved a survey of 298 out of the 3600 members of the HB-AEP affiliated groups following the rapid appraisal approaches. A proportionate random sampling procedure was used (Moser and Kalton 1979, p.86). A sample of 300 households or 10 per cent of all the members belonging to all groups were selected. Due to the need to represent agro-ecological as well as socio-economic variation that obtains in the area, a stratification criterion was devised in such a way that although all districts within the Diocese were covered, distribution within districts was weighted by respective shares of members. Questionnaires and check lists were developed. Enumerators received training and briefing for seven days covering general principles of surveys in social studies, and the purpose and objectives of the survey, structure, question wording and sequence, point by point. In the session preceding the field pre-testing, participants were exposed to techniques for approaching interviewees, introduction and securing interviews as well as managing time. Roles of the enumerators and supervisors were spelt out. The questionnaire was pre-tested within the local farming community prior to formal administration. Actual interviewing took place over a period of seven days. Following further checks for consistency, summary statistics were extracted. Modeling relationships between observations was facilitated through simple cross-tabulations, descriptive statistics and the fitting of the data to ordinary least squares (OLS) and logistic regression procedures.


141

Results Savings and Credit A salient feature of the results was that access to micro finance was an important factor in adoption of smalholder irrigation systems and construction of terraces. A total of 234 farmers in the sample indicated that they were saving with their respective VBs at monthly frequencies. Of these, at least 61 had benefited from the loan facilities offered by their VBs. The money borrowed was used to finance general business, crop and livestock production, general farm and general household expenditure. Most respondents (39 per cent) used loan money to set up, improve or to operate general business such as, cattle, cereals, clothing, dress making and general trade. This was followed by crop production (16 per cent) where the money borrowed was spent on purchase of seeds and general crop husbandry. Third place (15 per cent) was taken up by expenditure on livestock. This involved purchases of cows and goats and investment in dairy, poultry and the setting up of zero grazing units. Coming fourth and fifth were general farm (13 per cent) and household (5 per cent) expenditure. The main items of general farm expenditure were purchases of a wheelbarrow and oxen. General household expenditure was incurred on purchase of bicycles and payment of school fees. There were numerous other items of expenditure (12 per cent). Thus, the VB system was able to facilitate mobilization of local financial resources, and, indirectly, access to capital from outside the area. There was evidence of contribution to the local entrepreneurial acumen and general household welfare. The VB system still needs to receive external support in form of governance, managerial skills and modest infusions of loanable resources until sustainability is attained. The VB system is a potentially important focal point for collaboration with other stakeholders especially those in the private sector and NGO communities. Soil and Water Conservation A total of 48 km (mean, 175 meters per farm) of soil and water conservation structures such as check dams, retention ditches, tree planting, alley cropping, cover cropping and trash lines and mulching were constructed. Regression results for determinants of adoption or length of terraces are presented in Table 1. Table 1. Determinants of the farm level increase in length of terraces for rain water

harvesting Dependent variable = terrace length (m/ha)

Coefficients Asymptotic t ratio Significance

B Std. Error

(Constant) 211.005 255.905 0.825 0.431

Borrowing from Village Bank 98.297 94.039 1.045 0.323

Crop land size (ha) -53.912 26.386 -2.043 0.071

Soil and Water Conservation The strategy to promote sustainable land use by smallholders that was adopted by HB-AEP embraced soil conservation, tree planting (including agro-forestry practices), use of manure, composting, kitchen gardening, raised beds, double dug beds and use of organic repellents. No external inputs were required to implement any of these practices. As most these practices are labor intensive, their adoption would promote on-farm employment and possibly, generation of farm income through sales of vegetables and tree products. Survey results as


142

well as the synthesis of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) suggest that farmer response to these interventions was encouraging. The highest adoption rate was recorded for the use of organic repellents (per cent) followed by composting (per cent) and kitchen gardening. On farm tree nursery raising was fourth, followed by raised beds and double dug beds. Use of manure and soil conservation came seventh and eighth. Raising tree nurseries involves complicated steps while soil conservation practices are labor intensive. Implementation of either intervention may involve cash outlays. Terracing was the most popular soil conservation measure to be adopted by farmers were terracing (20 per cent), grass strips (12 per cent). In the third place in terms of popularity was mixed cropping, check dams and retention ditches (each accounting for 10 per cent). These were followed by tree planting, alley cropping, cover cropping and trash lines (7-8 percent). Some farmers carried out mulching as a soil conservation measure (3 per cent). There were many other miscellaneous approach to soil conservation by the members of AEP interviewed. The apparent popularity of building terraces as a strategy for controlling soil erosion could have been based on perceived effectiveness and promotional effort devoted to it. One expects that retention ditches to be popular in relatively semi-arid locations. The indicator of the effectiveness of soil conservation measures was the length of soil conservation measures achieved. Out of 298 households in the sample, 241 categorically stated that they had adopted at least one soil conservation practice. Farmers were assisted by enumerators to estimate the length of soil conservation measures that had been put in place. A total length of 48 km of soil conservation structures were in place by September 2000. The farm with the shortest structures in place had almost 4 meters (mean 175 and median 88 meters). Other practices like cover cropping, and alley cropping were not quantified because the aim was to provide an estimate of the effort that went into soil conservation. Irrigation Results indicated high adoption rates (7-22 percent for Rachuonyo and Migori Districts respectively) for the bucket system. Both systems were used for irrigating kitchen gardens, raised beds and double dug gardens. The reasons for the low rate of adoption of the T-pump irrigation technology that is promoted by approtech, as it emerged during the FGDs were that the cost of the technology is high, that there are difficulties with accessing loans and that operating the pump is tedious. Regression results for determinants of adoption of irrigation are presented in Table 2.


143

Table 2. Determinants of the adoption of bucket irrigation

Variables in the Equation Coefficients

B S.E. Wald Df Sig. Exp(B)

Intensity of participation at group meetings 0.181 0.215 0.71 1 0.399 1.199

Permanency of land tenure -0.345 0.291 1.4 1 0.237 0.708

Borrowing from Village Bank 0.037 0.588 0.004 1 0.95 1.038

Constant 0.01 1.241 0 1 0.994 1.01

Since adoption of the T pump was low, the results presented in Table 2. relate to the bucket system. Irrigation was used for raising small horticultural crops on kitchen gardens, double dug seed beds, and raised seed beds. The results of analysis of determinants of these developments are depicted in Table 3a-c. Table 3a. Determinants of adoption of Kitchen gardens



Borrowing from Village Bank -0.213 1.134 0.035 1 0.851 0.808

Crop land size (ha) 1.712 1.041 2.705 1 0.1 5.541

terrace length (m/ha) 0.002 0.004 0.236 1 0.627 1.002

If irrigation adopted 2.304 1.282 3.23 1 0.072 10.011

Constant -4.246 2.737 2.406 1 0.121 0.014

Table 3b. Determinants of adoption of raised seed beds



terrace length (m/ha) 0.002 0.009 0.037 1 0.848 1.002


Participation intensity (at group meetings)

-10.772 80.543 0.018 1 0.894 0

Constant 41.739 322.186 0.017 1 0.897 1.33947E+18

Table 3c. Determinants of adoption of double dug seed beds



Borrowing from Village Bank -1.41 0.735 3.674 1 0.055 0.244


Gender of household head 1.139 0.752 2.295 1 0.13 3.124

Intensity of participation at group meetings

0.246 0.311 0.622 1 0.43 1.278

Constant -2.833 1.491 3.609 1 0.057 0.059

Irrigation Jaetzold and Schmidt (1982) classified a significant proportion of the area as semi-arid. Many areas have good soils that are suitable for raising good crops. There are many sources of water that can be used to irrigate crops. Production of vegetables in the area is low and many families do not have access to sufficient quantities of this dietary component. Prospects for development of the market for fruits and vegetables are good. Yet the amount of rainfall received is too low and unreliable for most fruit and vegetable crops. To reliably raise reasonable vegetable crops farmers need to supplement rainfall with irrigation. HB-AEP adopted a number of low cost approaches to promotion of smallholder adoption of irrigation in the area.


144

The major types of low cost irrigation technology that were promoted by HB-AEP were bucket and T-pump technologies were promoted for adoption. Both are simple, labor intensive technologies which, if adopted on a wide scale, would have the effect of increasing productivity of the rural labor force thereby reducing unemployment. The survey results indicated that bucket method was adopted by the highest number of smallholders. In Migori District 28 smallholders representing 22 per cent of the sample were practicing bucket irrigation. This was followed by Homa Bay (23 smallholders), Suba (7 smallholders), Kuria (4 smallholders) and Rachuonyo (3 smallholders). Adoption of the T-pump technology did not feature prominently in the results of the survey. Only one respondent in Kuria was using the T-pump. Although the questionnaire did not address the reasons for the low rate of adoption of the T-pump irrigation technology, the were raised during the FDAs. One reason was the cost of the technology and the issues related to accessing a loan to finance its purchase. Another issue was that the pump is very tedious to work. Access to Information for Farming The Ministry of Agriculture has traditionally provided agricultural extension services to farmers in the rural areas at no cost to them. This entailed identification of the farmers sources of information about farming, the type and purpose of the information, the method of delivery and farmer evaluation of the information obtained. Farming information was obtained from at least 15 agencies. The most frequently mentioned sources were HB-AEP (88 per cent), the ministry of Agriculture (6 per cent) and CARE-Kenya (2 per cent). The most frequently used methods of passing on information were; verbal exchange between the farmer and extension agent during contact (59 per cent), demonstrations (13 per cent), and tours (12 per cent). Less frequently mentioned methods were seminars (5 per cent), contact with `technicians' (4 per cent), farm visits (4 per cent), and others. Farmer responses indicated that AEP used all the methods of conveying information to farmers. All the other agencies used the `verbal' method. The ministry of Agriculture, Netherlands, C-MAD and DANIDA also used demonstrations. The study on Agricultural Knowledge and Information Systems (ETC 1997, Table 6.) showed that AEP had linkages with all the 25 agencies that were active in disseminating information in the area, the only agency with such comprehensive linkage apart from the Ministry of Agriculture. While some farmers stated that they rarely were in contact with the extension agent (35 per cent), a fair proportion (34 per cent) reported that they were in contact at intervals of one monthly or less. A further 15 per cent, while not giving a quantitative indication of frequency of contact, stated that they were in contact with extension agents. No fewer than 17 techniques were mentioned by farmers as major subjects of the extension advice. Of these the most frequently mentioned were agro-forestry (25 per cent), organic farming (15 per cent), planting in rows (7 per cent) and general farming (8 per cent). The techniques adopted by the majority were soil conservation (75 per cent), organic farming (6 per cent) and crop husbandry (5 per cent). These indications suggest that the effort directed at passing on information to farmers was effective. Crop Production Parcels of land owned by smallholder households in the area averaged between 8 acres (Kuria and Homa Bay) and 21 acres (Suba). The proportions of total land devoted to crop production ranged between 49 and 69 per cent. At the time of the survey, adoption of the ox-


145

plogh technology stood at 23 per cent. The technology was used mainly for ploughing (21 per cent) and `digging' (20 per cent). Organic farming methods that farmers reported using were, boma manure, composting, kitchen gardening, double dug beds, and many others. Up to 95 per cent of the respondents reported that they were using at least one of the recommended organic farming practices. Farmers identified more than 18 food, horticultural and other cash crops. The most important crop in the five districts is maize. Overall, maize was ranked as the first crop by 55 per cent of all respondents. Second, third and fourth in importance were cassava, sorghum and beans. This ordering, however, varied from one district to another. This suggests that unless opportunities for supplementation through consumption of milk. meat, eggs, fish or other animal derived food, it is likely that the dietary intake of the residents of the area would be deficient in proteins. This would be an important motivation for investing effort in promoting production and use of grain legumes in the area. Use of improved crop varieties in addition to traditional types is a major aspect of this strategy. Important varieties of maize were the Kenya Seed Company Hybrids and Katumani composites (KCB and DLC). Overall, average grain production before 1997 was 1,600 kg/farm. Farmer estimates indicated that average grain production had increased to 2,033 kg/farm in 2000. Median production levels were 1,165 kg before 1997 and 1,380 at the time of the survey. Effectiveness of the construction of terraces on raising grain production is analysed in Table 4. Conclusions and Recommendations Many farmers were saving with their respective VBs and some had obtained credit from these. This seems to have resulted from the flexibility that this facility offers. Farmers who borrowed were able to service a variety of needs from this facility. The credit and savings component of HB-AEP still needs continued support from HB-AEP. Participation by collaborating agencies should be encouraged. Ways of simplifying the procedures for processing applications and disbursement should be sought. Adoption rates may be expected to increase as farmers become acquainted with them. Improved access to credit facilities to enable farmers to overcome the capital constraint will contribute to increased adoption of the technology and increased fruit and vegetable production in the area. References Beynon, J. 1996. `Financing agricultural research and extension for smallholder farmers in

sub-saharan Africa'. Natural Resource Perspectives. ODI. London. Carney, D. 1996. `Formal farmers organizations in the agricultural technology system:

current roles and future challenges.' Natural Resource Perspectives. ODI. London. Catholic Diocese of Homa Bay 1998-2000. Agriculture and Environment Program AEP.

Quarterly Progress Reports. Jaetzold, R., and Schmidt, H. 1982. Farm Management Handbook of Kenya. Vol II A, West

Kenya. Ministry of Agriculture, Nairobi. Nyoro, J.K. 1996. `Impact of market reform on seed development, multiplication and

distribution.’ In proceedings of the Egerton University Policy Analysis Matrix Conference, September 25th 1996.


146

Toward Good Agricultural Practices for Rice-Based Farming Systems Initial Results of the Development and Dissemination of the Rice-

Integrated Crop Management Sytems for Food Security, Livelihood Improvement and Environmental Conservation

Nguyen Van Nguu

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Abstract Rice is life for the majority of the world’s population and is deeply embedded in the cultural heritage of many societies. It is the staple food for more than half of the world population. Rice-based production systems in 113 countries in five continents and their associated post-harvest operations employ nearly one billion people worldwide. The General Assembly, during the 57th session in December 2002, through the Resolution A/Res 157/162 declared the International Year of Rice (IYR) – 2004. The resolution noted that rice is the staple food for more than half of the world’s population and affirmed the need to focus world attention on the role that rice can play in providing food security and eradicating poverty in the attainment of the internationally agreed-upon development goals, including those contained in the United Nations (UN) Millennium Declaration. About 75% of global rice production comes from irrigated system and since 1990, rice production has been facing several serious constraints ranging from declining production growth to diminishing land and water resources, declining economic return, and environmental pollution. The Expert Consultation on Yield Gap and Productivity Decline in Rice Production held in September 2000 in Rome, Italy recommended FAO and its member countries to develop and disseminate Integrated Crop Management systems or Rice-ICM system for improving the productivity and efficiency of irrigated rice systems. This paper presents the initial results of the development and dissemination of the Rice-ICM systems for irrigated rice production that the FAO’s Secretariat of the International Rice Commission has undertaken in collaboration with some member countries since 2000.

The Need for Integrated Systems to Manage Rice Crops In 1970s and early 1980s, several packages of production technologies for managing rice crops from land preparation to harvest were formulated and transferred to farmers in Asia. An example of these packages of production technologies is shown in Box 1. Elsewhere, the other systems for rice crop management that were developed and transferred to farmers included (1) the Markboouk-4 system was developed and disseminated for rice production in Egypt in 1985 (Balal, 1994), (2) the Système de riz intensification or system of rice intensification – popularly known as SRI – was developed and disseminated for farmers’ adoption in Madagascar in early 1985-86 (Uphoff, 2004), (3) the RiceCheck system was developed and disseminated for farmers’ adoption in Australia in 1986 (Lacy et al., 1993), and (4) the P-7 package of technologies (or P-7) was developed and disseminated for irrigated rice in Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali and Senegal in the early 1990s (Nguyen et al., 1994).


147

In Asia, the application of the packages of production technologies had helped to increase substantially rice yield and production. The growth rate of rice yield in Asia increased from 1.88 percent per year in the 1970s to 2.86 percent per year in the 1980s (Duwayri et. al., 1999). The wide adoption of the Markboouk-4 system in 1990 together with the introduction of new high-yielding varieties have helped the rice yield in Egypt to steadily increase from about 6 t/ha in 1989 to above 9 tons/ha in 2002 (FAOSTAT); while after the dissemination of the RiceCheck system in 1986, the Australian national yield increased rapidly and steadily from about 6 t/ha in 1987 to above 9 t/ha in 2000 (FAOSTAT). Australian rice scientists considered that half of the observed yield increases since 1986 can be attributed to the adoption of the RiceCheck system (Clampett et.al., 2001). National rice yields of Australia and Egypt were the world’s highest in 2000. The SRI, although has not substantially improved the national rice yield in Madagascar, is being transferred to farmers in other countries (Uphoff, 2004), whereas the P-7 has been adopted by the Special Programme for Food Security in some West African countries (Nguyen et al., 1994 and Nguyen, 2001). In Asia, the application of the production technology packages, however, had led to considerable damage to agricultural biodiversity, environmental degradation and pollution as well as to the development of new pests and pest-pressures and the mining of soil fertility (Tran and Ton That, 1990). The undesirable effects created by the application of the packages of production technologies for managing rice crops in 1970s and early 1980s have led to the development and dissemination of the Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in 1986. The IPM systems have been widely disseminated for rice production in Asia, especially in Indonesia, during late 1980s and 1990s, using the Farmer Field School approach. From management of insect pests, the IPM system expanded to cover disease, weed, and community pests at present (Gallagher et al., 2002). Other significant development include the Site Specific Nutrient Management developed and popularized by the International Rice Research Institute or IRRI (Dobermann et. al, 2004). Rice yield in Indonesia, however, has remained stagnant around 4.3-4.4 t/ha during 1990-2002 period (FAOSTAT), although the use of pesticides in rice production was greatly reduced with IPM system, suggesting the

BOX 1: Package of Production Technologies for Transplanted Rice in the Philippines in the

1970s (Cardenas et.al, 1980) • Application of Basal Fertilizer: Broadcast approximately 3/4 of the nitrogen fertilizer recommended in the

form of urea 45% N uniformly in the field. Harrow the field to puddle thoroughly in preparation for transplanting.

• Transplanting: Use 18-day-old seedlings and soak the roots in .12% concentration of carbofuran solution for 12 to 24 hours before transplanting. Transplant 2-3 seedlings/hill at 20 cm x 20 cm spacing in straight rows.

• 1-2 DAT: Apply carbofuran granules at 0.5 kg a.i./ha or diazinon at 1.0 kg a.i./ha

• 4-5 DAT: Apply 0.8 kg a.i./ha 2.4 D IPE G 3.2% if 2-3 cm depth of water is present in the paddy

• 6-8 DAT: If field is flooded and 2,4 D IPE G 3.2% cannot be applied at 4-5 DAT, apply butachlor or benthiocarb at rate of 1.5 kg a.i./ha

• 15-20 DAT: Spray 2,4 D IPE EC 48% or MCPA liquid herbicide at 0.8 kg a.i./ha if granular herbicide cannot be applied. Handweed the field if necessary to remove weeds that escaped herbicide treatment.

• 20 DAT: Broadcast carbofuran granules at 0.5 kg a.i./ha or 1.0 kg a.i./ha diazinon if there is standing water in the paddy or spray insecticides to control stemborers and green leafhoppers.

• 20-25 DAT: Broadcast 100 kgs ammonium sulfate 21% N as topdressing at panicle initiation.

• 20-45 DAT: If there is 10% or more deadheart, apply 0.5 kg a.i./ha of carbufuran.

• 45 DAT: If there is 10% or more deadheart, apply 1.0 kg a.i./ha of carbufuran.

• 50-55 DAT: At milk stage, spray insecticides to control rice bugs if there are more than 5 insect/m2 .

• 85-90 DAT: Harvest the crop.


148

failure of the IPM system to sustain the yield growth. This may be due to the fact that IPM deals only with one area of crop management in rice production - pest management. Farmers’ rice yields, including the world’s highest national yield, in 2000, however, were still much lower than the yield potential of the existing rice varieties. The indica variety IR8 – the first high yielding rice variety - yielded 10.3 tonnes/ha when planted at the experimental field of IRRI in Los Banos, Philippines in the dry season of 1965 (De Datta, 1981). In sub-tropical and temperate climate areas, the japonica variety YRL planted in Riverina, Australia in 1992 yielded 14.7 tonnes/ha (Kroff et al., 1994). In China, three-line hybrid rice varieties planted from 1986 to 1995 out-yielded the high-yielding varieties from 25 to 45 % depending on the year (Yuan, 1999). In Asia outside China, three-line hybrid rice varieties out-yielded high yielding varieties by at least 15% (Tran and Nguyen, 1998). Recently, a two-line super hybrid P64S/E32 yielded 17.1 tonnes/ha in 1999 and a three-line super hybrid II-32A/Ming86 created a record yield of 17.7 tonnes/ha in 2001 (Yuan 2004). The Global Consultation on Yield Gap and Productivity Decline in Rice Production, September 2000 in Rome, Italy, after reviewing the progress in the area of increasing the yield potential of rice and the yields that have been actually obtained by farmers in different country around the world, agreed that: (1) there is still a large yield gap in irrigated rice production and (2) the closing of this yield gap could increase substantially rice production without further investment in land and water development. The Expert Consultation also recommended FAO and its member countries to develop and disseminate Integrated Crop Management methodology/systems or systems for Rice Integrated Crop Management (Rice-ICM) in order to close the yield gap in irrigated rice. The Expert Consultation set the following guidelines for the development of the Rice-ICM systems:

• The Rice-ICM systems should include all component of rice cultivation from seed to seed.

• Technology recommendation or recommendations for a given area of crop management (e.g. insect and disease management, nutrient management, water management, weed management) should not be flexible and should not be fixed recommendations such as in the case of the packages of production technologies (see Box 1).

• Farmers are encourage to observe the plant growth and other factors in formulation/adoption of crop management technology for a given area of crop management; as in the case of IPM.

• In recognition of the experience that farmers have gained since the Green Revolution and the large variation of the agro-ecological and socio-economic environment of rice cultivation in different places, the new Rice-ICM system for a given location or environment should give priority to few crop management areas in the whole process of rice cultivation (for example: insect, weed, water). The identification of such areas should be done through a participatory approach with participation of all stake-holders including farmers, researchers, extension officers and local leaders.


149

The Development and Test of Rice-ICM Systems in Selected Countries In implementing the recommendations of the Expert Consultation, the Secretariat of the International Rice Commission began in 2000 to discuss and obtained collaboration from national programs in Bangladesh, Indonesia, China, the Philippines and Vietnam in Asia and Brazil in Latin America in the development and test of new Rice-ICM systems. The IRC Secretariat also participated and presented paper on the concept of Rice-ICM systems at the “PEAT” workshop organized by the African Rice Center (WARDA) in Saint Louis, Senegal and later at WARDA headquarters in Bouake, Côte D’ Ivoire in 2001. From this initial exercise, the Indonesian and the Vietnamese programs continued the development and test of new Rice-ICM systems using their own resources and/or with collaboration with IRRI. The national programs in Thailand and the Philippines requested FAO for technical support and obtained TCP projects for the development and transfer of Rice-ICM systems in 2002 (Thailand) and 2004 (Philippines). In Latin America, Brazil teamed up with Venezuela and through the Fund for Irrigated Rice in Latin America (FLAR) obtained funding support from the Common Fund for Commodity for the development and transfer of Rice-ICM systems in 2002. The Rice-ICM Systems in Indonesia and Vietnam The Indonesian Rice-ICM was developed and tested by scientists from the Indonesian Institute for Rice Research (IIRR) and the Indonesian Center for Food Crop Research and Development (ICFORD) during 1998-2000 period. The information and technology recommendations from SRI, the IRRI’s IPM Network, and the Mega Project were consulted, adapted and modified to form the Rice-ICM system (Woodhead, 2003 and Sarlan Abdulrachman et al, 2005). The Indonesian Rice-ICM system is not single component of technology oriented (such as IPM), but includes IPM, Integrated Nutrient Management (INM), Integrated Water Management (IWM) and other managements related to rice cultivation. The Indonesian Rice-ICM system is a set of principles that explains of why and how for (1) selection of the best and the higest yielding varieties and best quality of seed that can produce superior seedlings, (2) plant young and healthy seedlings, (3) seedling establishment, (4) crop need-based nutrient application, (5) incorporation of organic manure and nitrogen fertilizer into the soil, (6) intermittent irrigation and/or drying of soil, (7) frequent mechanical weeding, and (8) control of pest and diseases based on a regular field observation and early warning system whenever possible. The assessment of the Indonesian Rice-ICM system was first conducted in Grobogan district – Central Java in wet season (Nov – Feb) of 2000-2001 crop year and in nearby villages during the following season. In 2001, the assessment became part of the National ICM Network of the Indonesian Agency for Agricultural Research and Development (IAARD) and was conducted in 7 provinces. In 2002, the Integrated Rice Development Project, known with the acronym as P3T, was initiated and developed in 31 districts, located in 14 provinces to evaluate Rice-ICM system. In Vietnam, the “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical RiceCheck was developed, tested and transferred by the Cuu Long Rice Research Institute (CLRRI) since 2002. The information and technology recommendations of the Australian RiceCheck, the IRRI’s Site Specific Nutrient Management, the IPM and the newly and locally developed drum-seeding technique were consulted, adapted and modified to form the “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical

RiceCheck. The technological options developed for a site are highly location specific and are based on local farmers' needs and opportunities (Tran, 2004 and Pham Sy Tan et al, 2005).


150

The “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical RiceCheck was tested at O Mon District, Can Tho Province and Go Cong Tay, Tien Giang Province in the Mekong River Delta for 3 seasons: dry season 2003, wet season 2003, and dry season 2004. The Rice-ICM Systems in the Philippine and Thailand In Thailand the Rice-ICM system Thai RiceCheck was developed, tested and transferred by the Rice Research Institute of Thailand in 2002 during a National Workshop by integrating the Good Agriculture Practice (GAP) of rice producing technologies to increase the high production and good quality of rice yield (Clampett, 2003; Kunoot, 2005). In 2004, the Philippine Rice-ICM or PalayCheck was developed by Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) in early 2004 during a National Workshop on Rice Integrated Crop Management (Redona et al., 2004; Cruz et al, 2005). Both the Thai RiceCheck and the PalayCheck were pattern after the Australian’s RiceCheck. The Thai RiceCheck and the PalayCheck covers have 8 management areas or components: (1) seed selection and use, (2) land preparation, (3) crop establishment, (4) nutrient management, (5) insect pest and disease management, (6) weed management, (7) water management, and (8) harvest management. The Thai RiceCheck

has an additional area on rouging/purification of crop stand for seed production. An example of these Rice-ICM systems is found in Annex I. In 2004 wet season, the PalayCheck was tested with 20 farmers in 10 provinces across the country: Agusan del Norte and Agusan del Sur (3), Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat (3), Bohol and Negros Occidental (2), Isabela (1), Quirino Province (1), Ilocos Sur (1), Apayao (1), Nueva Ecija (6), Quezon and Sorsogon (1), and Laguna (1). The promising results of the initial implementation of PalayCheck has led to the expansion of the sites and an increase in the number farmer cooperators in 2004 wet season and 2005 dry season (Redona, 2005 personal communication). In Thailand, the Thai RiceCheck was tested with 200 farmers in 4 provinces: Pathumtani, Prachinburi, Sakhon-Nakorn and Phitsanulok during 2002-2003 cropping seasons (Clampett, 2003). The Rice-ICM Systems in Brazil and Venezuela The Rice-ICM systems in Brazil and Venezuela were developed, tested and transferred under the framework of the project “Bridging the Irrigated Rice Yield Gap in Venezuela and Rio

Grande do Sul, Brazil: Assistance to Rice Grower Associations”. The Rice-ICM system in Venezuela gave priority to the timing and method of land preparation to minimize the damage of the “black root” syndrome and the management of N,P and K fertilizers to reduce cost and environment damage; whereas the Rice-ICM system in Rio Grande do Sul emphasized management areas of date of planting, time and method of herbicide application, water management during the season, and Nitrogen fertilizer management (FLAR, 2002) Initial Results of the Application of Rice –ICM Systems The initial results demonstrate that the application of Rice-ICM systems has produced positive changes in the performance of irrigated rice cultivation in all countries showing (1) in general the increased productivity and profit, (2) in some case reduction in chemical inputs used in rice production, and (3) better grain quality. Effect of Rice-ICM systems on the Productivity of Irrigated Rice Positive effects of Rice-ICM systems on rice yield were reported in the 6 countries. In Thailand, an average yield increase of 26.7% was observed in 100 farmers in the Pathumtani, Prachinburi, Sakhon-Nakorn and Phitsanulok who participated in the application of Thai


151

RiceCheck during 2002-2003 period (Kunoot, 2005). In Brazil and Venezuela, the adoption of only the seeding on a right date as specified in Rice-ICM systems led to an increased rice yield as much as 30%. The seeding on a right date allowed the crop to grow under favourable climate, especially high level of solar radiation and reduced disease infection (Pulver, 2004 Personal communication). In Indonesia, the application of Rice-ICM systems during 2001-2002 increased rice yield in 25 districts out of 26 villages across the country. Yield increase in 13 villages ranged from 20 to 51% (Table 1). The increase in rice yield due to the application of the Vietnamese “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical RiceCheck, however, was not substantial; less than 5% in most cases (Table 2).


152

Table 1. Grain yields obtained by farmers in different villages across Indonesia in three

cropping season and yield change due to the application of Rice-ICM system, 2001 to 2002

(Sarlan Abdulrachman et al, 2005)

Province Village ICM farmers

(t/ha) Non ICM

farmers (t/ha) Yield change

(%)

Dry Season, 2001

North Sumatra Aras 6.0 5.0 20.0

Tanjung Kubah 6.1 5.0 22.0

West Sumatra P. Pakandangan 4.7 3.8 24.0

West Java Sukasenang 5.0 4.6 8.7

Bojongjaya 5.9 6.1 -3.3

Central Java Sugihan 7.5 7.0 7.1

Kliwonan (DS1) 6.4 4.8 33.3

Kliwonan (DS2) 8.0 7.6 5.3

East Java Gunungrejo (DS1) 9.3 7.4 25.7

Gunungrejo (DS2) 7.6 6.8 11.8

Tembalang (DS1) 8.5 7.3 16.4

Tembalang (DS2) 8.4 5.7 47.4

West Nusa Tenggara Jangala 7.4 6.5 13.9

Balo 5.9 4.3 37.2

South Sulawesi Matoanging 6.5 5.8 12.1

Bali Petiga (DS2) 7.6 5.7 33.3

Tunjuk 6.9 5.7 21.1

South Sulawesi Pinrang 8.0 6.5 23.1

Wet Season, 2001-2002

West Sumatra P. Pakandangan 5.3 3.5 51.4

West Nusa Tenggara Tanjung 7.1 5.7 24.6

Dry Season, 2002 North Sumatra Aras 5.5 3.8 44.7

West Java Sukasenang 5.7 4.8 18.8

Central Java Jetak 6.7 6.2 8.1

East Java Tembalang 6.7 5.9 13.6

Bali Tunjuk 7.1 6.4 10.9

West Nusa Tenggara Jenggala 9.1 7.9 15.2

Table 2 Change in rice yield with the application of “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical

RiceCheck in two districts in the Mekong River Delta during 2002-2003 period; DS = dry

season and WS = wet season (Pham Sy Tan et al, 2005)

WS2003 DS03-04

O mon Rice-ICM yield (t/ha) 6.47 3.96 6.77

Non Rice-ICM yield (t/ha) 6.36 3.71 6.45

Change % 1.7 6.3 4.7

Go cong Rice-ICM yield (t/ha) 6.06 4.14 6.24

Non Rice-ICM yield (t/ha) 5.83 4.02 6.1

Change % 3.8 2.9 2.2

In the Philippines, rice yield in 2004 wet season varied from 4 to 7 tons/ha and it (rice yield) correlated positively with the the number of management areas that farmers were able to


153

achived as measured and observed with the key checks that were provided in the PalayCheck (Fig. 1).

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

3 4 5 6 7 8

No. of Checks

Gra

in y

ield

, t/

ha

Figure 1. Yield response to number of crop management areas that farmers were able to

achieved, Wet Season 2004, Philippines (Cruz et al, 2005)

Effect of Rice-ICM Systems on the Production Cost and the Productivity of Irrigated Rice Information on production cost and profitability of irrigated rice production due to the application of Rice ICM systems was available only for Indonesia, Thailand and Viet Nam, while in the Phillipines, the gross margin of rice cultivation was reported. In Thailand, the application of Thai RiceCheck reduced the cost of rice cultivation, on the average, by about 16.8 % (Kunoot, 2005). However, in Indonesia, the application of Rice-ICM system increased the cost of cultivation in 7 districts, while reduced the cost of cultivation in 3 districts. However, in all districts the profit of rice cultivation was increased with the application of Rice-ICM system as a consequence of the increase in grain yield obtained from the application of Rice-ICM system (Table 3).


154

Table 3 Change in cultivation cost and profit due to the application of Rice-ICM system in 10

districts in Indonesia during 2002-2003 (Adapted from Sarlan Abdulrachman et al, 2005)

2002-2003 Wet Season 2003 Dry Season

District

Change in production cost

(1000 Rp) Change in profit

(1000 Rp)

Change in production cost

(1000 Rp) Change in profit

(1000 Rp)

Deli Serdang 66.5 1635.5 191.5 2294.8

Solok 378.3 1035.9 390.3 970.5

Pinrang 539.9 1933.4 399.8 1797.2

OKU 766.9 309 55 1065

Bojonegoro 287 868 278 934

Sambas 518.2 729.8 239.2 640.8

Blitar 360 1008 340 1212.5

Padang Pariaman -57 724 -57.5 743.5

Bima -121.4 1321.3 -263.7 534.6

Lampung Tengah -67 1422.5 -33.1 1261.6

In Vietnam, although the increase in rice yield was not substantial (Table 2), the decrease in the cultivation cost and the increase in profit from rice cultivation due to the application of “3

Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical RiceCheck were substantial (Table 4). The application of “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical RiceCheck reduced the quantities of fertilizers, pesticides and seed used in production (Three reductions), while increased yield, quality and profit (Three increases). Table 4 Change in cultivation cost, net profit, and input used in rice cultivation in O Mon and

Go Cong districts due to the application of “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical RiceCheck

(Adapted from Pham Sy Tan et al, 2005)

O Mon Go Cong

DS02-03 WS2003 DS03-04 DS02-03 WS2003 DS03-04

Total Cost ($US/ha) -53.86 -31.15 -22.06 -34.68 -41.11 -18.88

Net Profit ($US/ha) 64.41 43.83 49.85 +97.95 +58.01 +35.95

Fertilizer ($US/ha) -11.35 -6.34 -6.33 -3.32 -11.39 -8.69

- N (kg N/ha) -12 -11 -11 -3 -15 -7

- P (kg P2O5/ha) -27 -2 -17 -15 -4 -5

- P (kg K2O/ha) +17 -5 +12 +1 -17 +2

Pesticide (USD/ha) -17.30 -8.52 -5.96 -20.99 -12.63 -3.30

Seed ($US/ha) -17.45 -11.24 -7.29 -13.09 -12.64 -9.01

Seed rate (kg/ha) -165 -62 -68 -117 -79 -74

Labour ($US/ha) -7.76 -5.05 -2.48 -0.58 -4.13 2.12


155

Sarlan Abdulrachman et al (2005) reported that the analysis of records kept by Indonesian farmers who applied Rice-ICM system also indicated the following observations:

• Seed treatment, rodent control, and use of young seedling (15 day-old) saved 15-40 kgs of seed/ha

• The application of organic matters combined with the use of leaf color chart to determine the application of Urea fertilizer reduced the quantity of applied Urea by 140 kgs/ha

• internmittent irrigation reduced water consumption by 24.7% in Sukamandi and 22.0% in Kuningan as compared to the existing irrigation practices.

• Pair row plant spacing (Legowo) system of 4:1 or 2:1 was highly preferred by farmers at North Sumatra, West Sumatra, West Java and East Java AIATs, because it produced higher grain yield compared to the usual plant spacing (tegel) system. The single seedling and young age (15 days after sowing) was first widely adopted by farmers in Central Java and East Java who applied Rice-ICM; but later they abandon this practice due to heavy damage by golden snails and mole crickets.

In the Philippines, the results showed that farmers who achieved eight crop management areas as measured by the key checks in the PalayCheck had an average gross margin of US$ 828 per hectare, while farmers who achieved only three crop management areas had an average gross margin of US$ 421 per hectare (Figure 2)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

3 4 5 6 7 8

No. of Checks

Gro

ss m

arg

in, U

S$/h

a

Figure 2. Gross margin responses to number of crop management areas achieved by farmers,

Wet Season 2004, Philippines (Cruz et al, 2005).

Other Impacts of Rice –ICM Systems

In Indonesia, Rice-ICM system is being considered as an innovation of technology for the irrigated lowland rice, which recently its sustainability is alarming and the Rice-ICM system was used as an approach for developing rice farming system in the irrigated land. Since its implementation, the Rice-ICM system has been widely adopted by farmers and it (the Rice-ICM system) was further improved by research system and became part of the national program of Integrated Rice Development Project and Enhancement Program. In 2003, the coverage area of P3T was extended into 41 districts located in 22 provinces - in each district,


156

a 100 ha was developed as a model of sustainable rice intensification (Sarlan Abdulrachman et al, 2005).

In Vietnam, the adoption of “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical RiceCheck had spread to more than 90% of the farmers in O Mon and Vi Thuy districts of Can Tho province and in recignition to this achievement, the Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development awarded the 2003 Golden Rice Award to the leader of the program (Rice Today, April-June, 2004). The Chairman of the Binh Tay Agriculture-General Trading Co-operative reported that, due to improvement of grain quality, the rice produced in Go Cong district with the “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical RiceCheck was recently approved by European Commission for export to Europe’s markets (Nguyen Van Muoi, 2005 Personal communication).

In 2004 the Thai Ricecheck was transferred to 1203 farmers in 11 provinces. In 2004-2005, the Thailand’s Rice Research Institute (RRI) have modified the keychecks for 8 provinces. Also, RRI has integrated the Thai Ricecheck into its program on Good Agriculture Practices (GAP) for producing good quality rice (Kunoot, 2005). The RRI also produced the Thai

RiceCheck in VCD media in order to facilitate the training of extension workers and farmers. In the Philippines, the number of key checks in the PalayCheck were recently reduced to seven. After the review, PhilRice Deputy Director of Research and Development, Dr. Edilberto D. Redoña, proposed that the trials should be extended for two more cropping seasons. He also recommended for its integration into the different Research and Development Programs of PhilRice in accordance with the current farming practices and possible upscaling into a national program with the support of the Department of Agriculture. He also said that a training and extension program should be developed and the number of sites, Local Government Units (LGUs) and Non-governmental Orgainzations (NGOs) involved should be increased (http://www.philrice.gov.ph/newsroom.php?newsTag=733). The Way Forward The key to successful rice farming has always been the rice farmers themselves and their families. However, societies have been susceptible to substantial change during the last century. Modern transportation – even as simple as a bicycle or motor scooter or improved public transportation in many regions – enables farmers to keep a closer watch on what is happening to their crops during the entire growing cycle; this leads to better management and better results. No longer are all rural farmers excluded from what is happening in the news nor do they miss out on the advantages of the urban world. They connect to world views and world markets through the airwaves of radio and television. Even if their village is not yet electrified, they are probably close to a larger village where they can go to plug in to the outside world. The news from the television and radio keeps farmers and their families informed of what is happening in their province and country, as well as in the rest of the world. Most national policies dictate that all children should be educated – this means that even illiterate adult farmers are being introduced to written knowledge through their educated children. Children can help their parents read training materials or help them understand the mathematics needed for dealing with market purchases and sales. With e-mail, the Internet and mobile phone connections, research results can be distributed globally in seconds, scientists can communicate with each other and with extensionists in the field, sharing


157

successes, handling problems and giving all farmers the potential to benefit from new technologies and technical innovation for rice cultivation around the world. Improved technologies and innovations are essential, but their effective adoption by farmers is critical for sustainable rice development for life. Farmers need to know not only what to do and how to apply technologies in managing their crop, but they also need to check at every growth phase of the rice crop the performance of their crop management: from the selection of the varieties and seeds to be planted, to land preparation, crop protection, crop nutrition, water supply, harvest and post-harvest processing. Self-evaluation of crop management would help farmers to correct their mistakes and improve with time. The Thai RiceCheck and the PalayCheck of the Philippines offer as examples on how Rice-ICM systems could assist farmers in self-improvement of their crop management skill. Globalization continues to advance in the marketing of food products. The involvement of supermarket chains and convenience stores in the storage, distribution and sale of food products including alimentary rice products will increase with the expansion of urbanization. Greater effort from rice farmers and rice processors will consequently be required to turn out products that meet certain standards and quality requirements. Application of good agricultural practices in rice-based systems would be needed to enhance the marketability of rice and rice-based products for income generation. The improvement of the quality of rice grain produced with “3 Increases, 3 Reductions” Tropical RiceCheck in Go Cong district, Tien Giang province, Viet Nam is another example of the potential of Rice-ICM systems in promoting Good Agricultural Practices in rice-based farming systems in the near future. References Balal MS (1994) Overview of rice production and research in Egypt. Paper presented at the

18th Session of the International Rice Commission, 5-9 September 1994, Rome, Italy. Cardenas AC, Dilag Jr RT, Pantastico EB and Haws LD (1980) An approach to rainfed

farming: The Philippine case. Philippine Council for Agriculture and Resources Research and Bureau of Agricultural Extension, Ministry of Agriculture, Philippines. Manila, 1980

Clampett W (2003) Report of the Consultancy mission for project TCP/THA/0167 Training on Integrated Crop Management Technologies for Production of Good Quality Rice Seed. Mission June 2003

Clampett WS, Williams RL and Lacy JM (2001) Major achievements in closing yield gaps of rice between research and farmers in Australia. PP 441-428 in Yield Gap and Productivity Decline in Rice Production - proceedings of the Expert Consultation held in Rome, 5-7 September 2000; FAO, Rome, Italy 2001.

Cruz RT, Llanto GP, Castro AP, Barroga KET, Bordey FH, Redoña ED, and Sebastian LS (2005) PalayCheck: The Philippines’ Rice Integrated Crop Management System. Paper presented at a Consultation Workshop on Rice Integrated Crop Management Systems – Rice Check Methodology for Food Security, Livelihood Improvement and Environmental Conservation, 28 Feb. to 2 March 2005 at Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam.

De Datta, SK (1981) Principles and practices of rice production. Wiley and Sons. Dobermann A, C Witt, and D Dawe (2004) Increasing Productivity of Intensive Rice Systems

through Ste-Specific Nutrient Management. IRRI and Science Publishers Inc.,. Philippines

Duwayri M, Tran DV and Nguyen VN (1999) Reflections on yield gaps in rice production. IRC Newsletters 48: 13-26

FAOSTAT http://faostat.external.fao.org/faostat/collections?subset=agriculture


158

FLAR (The Latin American Fund for Irrigated Rice) (2002) Bridging the Yield Gap in Irrigated Rice in Venezuela and Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil:Assistance to Irrigated Rice Producer Associations. Project document submitted to CFC

Gallagher KD, Ooi PAC, Mew TW, Borromeo E, and Kenmore PE (2002) Integrated pest management in rice. IRC Newsletters 51: 9-23

Kroff MJ, Williams RL, Horie T, Angus JF, Singh U, Centeno HG and Cassman KG (1994) Predicting yield potential of rice in different environments. PP 657-663 in Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Temperate Rice – Achievements and potentials. Yanco, NSW, Australia, 21-24 Feb 1994

Lacy J, Clampett WS, Lewin L, Reinke R, Batten G, Williams R, Beale P, McCaffery D, Lattimore M, Schipp A, Salvestro R and Nagy J (1993) The 1993 Ricecheck Recommendations. NSW Agriculture and Rice Research and Development Committee, Australia. Booklet. 16 pp

Laddawan Kunnoot (2005) Development and Dissemination of Thai RiceCheck: Results and Recommendations. Paper presented at a Consultation Workshop on Rice Integrated Crop Management Systems – Rice Check Methodology for Food Security, Livelihood Improvement and Environmental Conservation, 28 Feb. to 2 March 2005 at Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam.

Nguyen VN (2001) Technology transfer for irrigated rice production in the Senegal River valley under the Special Programme for Food Security. IRC Newsletters 50: 67-72

Nguyen VN, Tran DV, Bautista RC, Maiga M and Weerapat P (1994) “Thriving with Rice” technologies for small farmers in irrigated systems in sub-Saharan Africa. IRC Newsletter 43: 33-39

Pham Sy Tan, Trinh Quang Khuong and Tran Van Dat (2005) Integrated Crop Management for Intensive Irrigated Rice in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam: Case studies in Can Tho and Tien Giang provinces. Paper presented at a Consultation Workshop on Rice Integrated Crop Management Systems – Rice Check Methodology for Food Security, Livelihood Improvement and Environmental Conservation, 28 Feb. to 2 March 2005 at Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam.

Redona ED, Castro AP and Llanto GP (2004) Rice Integrated Crop Management: Towards a RiceCheck System in the Philippines. PhilRice, Philippines

RiceToday (IRRI), April-June 2004: Vol 3 No 2: 7 Sarlan Abdulrachman, Irsal Las and Iwan Yuliardi (2005) Development and Dissemination of

Integrated Crop Management for Productive and Efficient Rice Production in Indonesia. Paper presented at a Consultation Workshop on Rice Integrated Crop Management Systems – Rice Check Methodology for Food Security, Livelihood Improvement and Environmental Conservation, 28 Feb. to 2 March 2005 at Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam.

Tran DV (2004) Back to Office report, official mission to Vietnam in January 2004 Tran DV and Nguyen VN (1998) Global hybrid rice: Progress, issues, and challenges. IRC

Newsletters 47: 16-28 Tran DV and Ton That T (1990) Second generation of high-yielding rice varieties. IRC

Newsletters 39: 127-132 Uphoff, N (2004) SRI -- The system of rice intensification: an opportunity for raising

productivity in the 21st century. Paper presented at the Side Event during the International Year of Rice Conference, FAO, Rome, February 12-13, 2004

Woodhead T (2003) Back to Office report, FAO consultancy mission to Indonesia in February 2003

Yuan Longping (2004) Hybrid Rice for Food Security in the World. Keynotes presented at the International Year of Rice Conference, FAO, Rome, February 12-13, 2004


159

Yuan LP (1999) Hybrid rice development and use: Innovative approach and challenges. PP. 77-85 in Proceedings of the 19th Session of International Rice Commission, Cairo, Egypt, 7-9 September 1998. FAO, Rome, Italy, 1999


160

ANNEX I The Expanded Version of the PalayTandaan/PalayCheck for 2004 Wet Season. Philippine RiceCheck Recommendations for Transplanted Irrigated Lowland Rice

Goal: Improved yield, grain quality, and profit without harming the environment

1. SEED QUALITY: “Use pure and high quality seeds of the best variety for your area.”

Key Check: Use pure seeds with at least 85% germination.

� Choose the variety to plant based on results of technology demonstrations,

adaptability trials, and market demand.

Farmers often prefer new varieties. They believe that new varieties are higher yielding than previously released ones. But, a variety may be released based on reasons other than yield (e.g., better grain quality resistance to certain pests). If you decide to plant a new variety, make sure that it has been tested in your area for more than a year either through techno demo or adaptability trials. The variety must help solve production problems and command a high price in your locality.

� Use seeds certified by the National Seed Quality Control Services or that came

from a field where off-types have been completely removed, particularly before

and at flowering stage.

Many farmers use home-saved seeds to save on costs. This is not wrong as long as rouging has been thoroughly performed to ensure that the seeds are pure and of high quality. This means that the seedlot does not contain seeds of other varieties, and seeds are full and uniform in size, and generally free of weeds, insects, diseases, and other matters. Otherwise, it would be better to buy from credible or trusted seed growers or from the NSQCS. The sack of certified seeds from NSQCS has a blue tag.

Use of pure and high quality seeds leads to vigorous early crop growth that reduces weed problems and increases crop resistance to insect pests and diseases. All this contributes to a 5-20% increase in yield. It also leads to higher germination rate (at least 85%); reduced replanting cost; more uniform plant stand; and lower postproduction losses.

To test for germination, select 100 random samples from the seeds to be planted. Soak the seeds in water for 24 hours. Arrange 100 soaked seeds in a grid pattern on a wet paper. Either put the paper inside a closed container or cover the seeds with another moist paper, roll together, and put it inside a plastic bag. Ensure that the paper remains moist, but not wet to the point of water running off or seed will rot. Count the germinated seeds 1 or 2 days later and record the germination percentage [(number of seeds germinated/100 seeds) x 100]. Seeds should have at least 85% germination.

2. LAND PREPARATION: “Level your field properly.”

��


161

Key Check : Achieve no high and low soil spots at initial flooding after the final harrowing.

� Repair and construct ditches and dikes.

These will help reduce the amount of water to be used for land preparation and leveling, and ensure even water loss and, hence rapid distribution of water. Dikes must be clean, compacted, and narrow while ditches must be constructed around the field to facilitate water management.

� Incorporate stubbles and weeds 3-4 weeks before transplanting to allow

decomposition.

This will control weeds and recycle plant nutrients. Decomposition is faster if soil is moist. If stubbles and weeds are not properly decomposed, the soil will have high temperature that can kill rice seedlings. There will also be an accumulation of organic acids, hence some nutrients become less available.

� Identify the field’s high and low spots and plan the most efficient manner to move

soil and equipment.

Move soil from the high to the low spots. If the soil has to be dragged more than 50 meters, first move soil from the middle of the field to the lowest places and then from the higher places to the middle of the field. Find the most efficient method to do this according to local cultivation practices.

A properly leveled field improves water coverage that reduces the amount of water required for land preparation; improves crop establishment; decreases the time to complete tasks; reduces weed problems by up to 40%; and results in uniform crop maturity.

� Ensure good drainage and soft soil condition before transplanting.

Build small canals (e.g., 10-15 cm deep) that run from the middle of the field to the drainage points. This will help control drainage direction. Draining allows toxic substances to be eradicated and organic matter to decompose. It also helps the plant produce deeper and stronger roots.

3. CROP ESTABLISHMENT: “Sow the right amount of seeds following local planting

Key Check: Achieve at least 1 healthy seedling/hill at 10 days after transplanting.

1. Establish seedbed near a water source and protect it from pests, particularly birds

and rodents. It should have good drainage.

Proper water and pest management are important at this stage. If the germinated seeds are covered too deeply with water, this will result in tall, weak seedlings and poor root growth because of lack of air in the soil. Those tall seedlings are easily damaged when transplanted.

Birds and rodents feed on seeds directly and pull up germinating seeds that is why it is important to guard the seedbed against these pests.

��

��


162

2. Incorporate 10-15 bags organic material or 3-4 bags commercial organic

fertilizer in a 400 m2 seedbed.

Organic materials help loosen the soil, thus it is easier to pull the seedlings, minimizing root damage. Use compost or any organic materials such as dried animal manure, rice hull ash, or rice straw. Apply the organic materials before leveling the seedbed surface.

3. Follow the local planting calendar and the recommendations below:

Variety Seeding

Rate

Seedbed Area Age of

Seedlings

No. of

Seedlings

Planting Distance

Inbred 40 kg/ha 1-3/hill

Hybrid 20 kg/ha

400 m2 (e.g., 10 beds of 2 m x 20

m)

20-25 days 1-2/hill

20 cm x 20 cm

Sowing the right amount of seeds results in strong and healthy seedlings. These seedlings have higher survival rate and easily recovers from transplanting shock. Proper spacing gives good ground cover by the crop that helps control weeds. Following the local planting calendar reduces pest and disease pressures and facilitates water distribution within the community.

4. NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT: “Feed the rice plants with the right nutrients as needed.” Key Check: Maintain LCC reading of 4 from early tillering to early flowering. Key Check: Achieve at least 24 tillers/hill at panicle initiation.

� Know the nutrients that your soil needs by using the minus one element technique,

omission plots, soil testing, or prior experience based on yield.

Nutrients influence crop growth, development, and yield. Proper application of

nutrients improves growth and grain yields of rice plants. Proper application means providing the nutrients to the plant in the amount and at the time required. Rice plants have better response to fertilizer when there is more sunlight.

� For nitrogen: Within 14 days after transplanting, apply not more than 30 kg/ha.

Then, use the leaf color chart weekly until early flowering.

Nitrogen promotes rapid growth (increased plant height and number of tillers) and increased leaf size, spikelet number per panicle, percentage filled spikelets, and grain protein content. Thus, N affects all parameters contributing to yield. If N is deficient, plants become stunted and yellowish. However, if there is too much N, particularly between panicle initiation and flowering stage, the rice plant is prone to lodging and attack of pests.

The Leaf Color Chart is a simple tool that can generate 20-25% savings in nitrogen usage. It helps farmers determine the right time of N application to the rice crop by measuring the leaf color intensity. If more than 5 out of 10 leaves read below the critical value of 4, apply 1.5 bags of 46-0-0 (urea) or 3.5 bags of 21-0-0-25 (ammonium sulfate) during the DS and 1 bag of 46-0-0 or 2 bags of 21-0-0 during the WS.

��


163

� For phosphorous and potassium: Apply based on cropping season, soil type, and

target yield.

Parameter Wet or Low-yielding Season

(3-5 t/ha target yield)

Dry or High-yielding Season (6-7 t/ha target yield)

P & K are not deficient

Basal: 2-3 bags 14-14-14 per ha Basal: 3-4 bags 14-14-14 per ha

P & K are deficient Basal: 2-3 bags 14-14-14 per ha 1 bag 0-18-0 per ha PI: 0.5 bag 0-0-60 per ha

Basal: 3-4 bags 14-14-14 per ha 1 bag 0-18-0 per ha PI: 1 bag 0-0-60 per ha

Only P is deficient Basal: 2-3 bags 14-14-14 per ha 1 bag 0-18-0 per ha

Basal: 3-4 bags 14-14-14 per ha 1 bag 0-18-0 per ha

Only K is deficient Basal: 2-3 bags 14-14-14 per ha PI: 0.5 bag 0-0-60 per ha

Basal: 3-4 bags 14-14-14 per ha PI: 1 bag 0-0-60 per ha

Phosphorous fertilizer is important for root development, tillering, early flowering, and ripening. Its deficiency is difficult to detect unless severe. Phosphorus-deficient plants are stunted with greatly reduced tillering. Leaves are narrow, short, very erect, and dark green. Stems are thin and plant development is retarded. The number of leaves, panicles, and grains per panicle are also reduced.

Potassium improves root growth and plant vigor and helps prevent lodging. It also enhances crop resistance to pests and diseases. Potassium deficiency is often not detected because its symptoms are not as easy to recognize as those of N and P deficiency, and symptoms tend to appear during later growth stages. Potassium-deficient plants are dark green with yellowish brown leaf margins. Its leaf symptoms of yellowish brown margins are similar to those of tungro virus disease. Unlike potassium deficiency, however, tungro occurs as patches within a field, affecting single hills rather than the whole field. Dark brown spots can also be seen on the leaf surface of potassium-deficient plants. These symptoms are more likely to occur in hybrid rice varieties than in inbreds because of their greater potassium demand.

� For zinc and sulfur deficiencies: Apply 25 kg zinc sulfate/ha per year 2 weeks

after transplanting.

Zinc deficiency is the most widespread micronutrient-related problem in rice. Its symptoms appear between 2-4 weeks after transplanting. These include rusty brown spots on old leaves, yellowish young leaves at the base and midrib, stunted plants, uneven plant growth, and patches of poorly established hills in the field. Rice plants, however, can recover from symptoms soon after the field is drained. Severe deficiency, on the other hand, results in reduced number of tillers and delayed maturity. Sulfur deficiency is often mistaken for nitrogen deficiency. But, in contrast to N deficiency where older leaves are affected first, sulfur deficiency results in yellowing (chlorosis) of young leaves. Leaves are a paler yellow in sulfur-deficient plants. Other symptoms include reduced plant height and stunted growth (but plants are not dark-colored as in P or K deficiency), reduced number of tillers, fewer and shorter panicles, reduced number of spikelets per panicle,


164

delayed maturity, high seedling mortality after transplanting, and yellowish seedlings in seedbeds.5. WATER MANAGEMENT: “Maintain appropriate

water depth.” Key Check: Achieve 3-5 cm water depth from early tillering to grain filling stage.

Water is needed for the transport of nutrients from the soil to the different plant parts. An adequate water supply will ensure good crop establishment, seedling vigor, and normal crop growth and development. On the other hand, lack of water especially at flowering stage will reduce grain yield. Once sterility occurs because of water deficit, the plant cannot compensate for it. Leaf-rolling, leaf-scorching, stunting, and reduced panicle exsertion are symptoms of water-deficit rice plants.

� Drain water 1-2 weeks before harvest.

This will facilitate harvest operations and help ensure better grain quality (i.e., grains will not be splashed with mud and water during harvest operations).

6. PEST MANAGEMENT: “Apply appropriate pest management technology.”

Key Check: Ensure no significant yield loss from insect pests, diseases, rats, snails, and weeds.

� Use varieties resistant to pests and diseases prevalent in the locality.

The use of resistant varieties is the first line of defense in pest management. With a resistant host plant, only minimal pest management interventions are necessary.

� Practice synchronous planting.

Planting within a month of the regular planting time in the community will allow fewer stem borer generations to multiply within the cropping season thus, reducing damage. It also stops food supply of pests and prevents continued multiplication of pests. Farmers’ organizations should advocate for a less variable and controlled irrigation water supply.

� Conserve beneficial organisms.

Not all insects are pests. Some are beneficial or neutral. A typical rice field supports 800 species of “friendly or beneficial insects” that, if recognized and conserved, can control 95% of insect pests without pesticides. Indiscriminate use of pesticides can easily disrupt the natural balance between insect pests and the beneficial insects and organisms. Thus, insecticides must be used judiciously to conserve and maximize the effect of the beneficial organisms. Conserving beneficial organisms is a cheap, effective, “permanent”, and non-disruptive way of managing pests. Presence of non-rice habitats around the field provides alternate food or shelter area for beneficial organisms.

� Do not spray against leaf feeding insects within first 30 days after transplanting.

��

��


165

Rats Snails Weeds Insect pests and diseases

No significant economic damage

Less than 1/5 of field has damaged stems

Less than 1/10 of field with snails and eggs at 10 DAT

Less than 1/5 of field with weeds at 18 DAT

Less than 1/5 of field with symptoms

Spraying pesticides is not the only way to protect the rice plant from pests. Not all damage to the rice plants is due to pests nor do all this damage lowers yield.

Insect pests: Note that pests are typically more mobile and multiply quickly than beneficial insects. Therefore, early pesticide applications will generally benefit pests. Damage, however, depends on the plant’s growth stage and ability to compensate. For stem borers, proper timing of planting is important (e.g., in the Science City of Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, transplant in January and in July to avoid stem borer attack). Bacterial blight, sheath blight, and blast can be reduced indirectly with LCC-based N fertilizer application. For tungro, observe one month fallow period.

Diseases: Regular monitoring, correct diagnosis, and field sanitation help prevent the spread of diseases. To diagnose the disease, compare the appearance of the infected plant with other plants of the same variety and age. Consider disease distribution, spread, and condition of the field. It also helps to examine closely the infected plant and see if there are other organisms on it. To minimize disease occurrence, avoid too much application of fertilizer, three croppings in a year, unnecessary use of pesticides, asynchronous planting, and growing varieties with low resistance to diseases prevalent in your area.

Rats: The feeding damage on the stem caused by the rice field rats is usually

distinguished by a 45° clean cut of the tiller. Management of rats should focus on limiting its population growth. One way of doing this is by putting up a trap barrier system. The use of rat trap barrier system is done in synchrony with community rat control operations.

Golden apple snails: Snails cut and kill young, growing rice seedlings and leave large patches without rice. Maintain saturated field condition in early vegetative stage to control it. Weeds: The key to decrease its population relies on a wide range of practices: good and timely land preparation, good land leveling, good water management, good crop establishment, healthy clean seeds, varieties with good early vigor, and where necessary sound and appropriate use of agrochemicals. Control is critical during the first 15-20 DAT. Apply pre-emergence or early post emergence herbicides.

7. HARVEST MANAGEMENT: “Harvest crop at the right maturity stage” Key Check: Harvest the crop when 1/5 of panicle length or 4-5 grains at the base of the primary panicle are in hard dough stage.

� Harvest at 20-25% moisture content in wet season and 18-21% moisture content

in dry season. It is advisable to use a grain moisture meter.

��


166

Correct timing of harvesting (80-85% maturity) ensures good grain quality, high market value, and improved consumer acceptance. Too early harvesting results in a larger percentage of unfilled or immature grains and in higher grain breakage during milling. Too late harvesting leads to increased shattering in rice and excessive losses in terms of breakage in milling.

8. POST PRODUCTION: “Thresh, clean, and dry immediately before storing in clean

sacks” Key Check: Achieve Premium Grade 1 for palay

� Avoid piling up of wet palay.

Grains stacked of high moisture content results in discoloration or yellowing of milled rice.

� Thresh right after harvest and use a clean thresher with correct machine settings.

Postponing threshing by piling the harvested crop along the field for more than a day will result in heat buildup in the grain. This will result in grain discoloration and lower quality of milled rice. If you rely on a contractor for threshing, avoid delays in threshing by choosing a harvesting date depending on the availability of the contractor and good weather condition. A high speed in threshing results in higher grain damage while a low speed increases the amount of non-threshed grain and results in grain loss. Adjust blower to the correct speed (approx. 800 rpm) to provide good initial cleaning.

� Initiate drying within 24 hours, mixing palay regularly while drying. Achieve 14%

moisture content.

Drying will reduce grain moisture content down to a safe level for storage. It is the most critical operation after harvesting. Palay should be dried to 14% MC as soon as possible after threshing. Drying provides preliminary control against insect infestation, and reduces losses from natural respiration. Proper drying procedures ensure palay with good milling quality (i.e., high head rice and high milling recovery). Drying involves two stages: (a) drying of "surface" moisture which brings grain moisture content down to around 18% MC and (b) drying to remove "internal" moisture. Sun drying is the most common drying method used but this must be done properly. Palay must be turned or stirred at least once per hour to achieve uniform MC.

Proper drying results in increased storage life of the grains, prevention of deterioration in quality, reduction of biological respiration that leads to quality loss of grains, and optimum milling recovery. Prolonged field drying (rice in stalks are left in the field) should be avoided to reduce losses through shattering and to preserve the grain quality. Delays in drying, incomplete drying, or ineffective drying reduces grain quality and results in losses.

� Store grains in a dry, well-ventilated, and pest-free room.

��


167

The longer the grain needs to be stored, the lower the required MC of the grain. At 18% MC, grains can be stored for only 2 weeks; at 12-14%MC, for 1 year; and at 8-10% MC, for more than 1 year.

Grains are often prone to quantity and quality losses during storage. The 2-6% losses are often due to factors such as mechanical, chemical and biological processes occurring during storage. Hence, the storage structure should be watertight, airtight, rodent- and bird-proof, and well ventilated under normal conditions. It should be provided with air vents or windows for continuous flow of air inside the warehouse.


168

Risk assessment, market uncertainties and diversification strategies for rubber farmers: comparison between

Indonesia and Cambodia using farming systems modelling

E. Penot, & L. Feintrenie

CIRAD-TERA, Montpellier, CNEARC, Montpellier, France.

Abstract Prospective analysis using farming systems modelling (FSM) helps explore farmers’ strategies and create scenarios in different contexts such as pioneer zones, rehabilitation areas or traditional tree-crop belts in the humid tropics and in a new context of globalisation, decentralisation and market uncertainty. Combined with social and historical analysis, economic modelling contributes to building better and more suitable alternatives in terms of decision-making processes in partnership with both farmers and developers. This approach helps farmers to make the right decision at the right time concerning their future investments, in particular when tree-crops are involved. CIRAD/INRA/IAMM developed a software called « Olympe » that enables modelling of farming systems as well as farming groups. Use of this software aims to improve farmers’ understanding of their own situation and of their actual socio-economic context and also provides orientations for agricultural and development policies for institutions or donors. Prospective analysis enables the creation of scenarios of potential farm pathways that can be used in the definition of agricultural policies, recommendations and to measure the likely impacts of such policies so they can be adapted to the real situation faced by farmers. In this paper, a comparison between the situations of rubber farmers in Indonesia and Cambodia illustrates this approach.

Introduction: Olympe software used as a modelling tool. Detailed knowledge of local farming systems and farmers’ strategies in a range of different contexts such as pioneer zones, rehabilitation areas or traditional tree-crop belts, contributes to building better and more suitable alternative solutions and proposals to help farmers make the right decision at the right time concerning their future investments. INRA5, CIRAD and IAMM) developed a farming systems modelling software called « Olympe » (Penot, 2003) that provides an economic evaluation of farming activities (all types of livestock and cropping systems) and income generation over a period of 10 years. In addition to functioning at the scale of individual farms, the software also enables analysis at the scale of groups of farms for example at the scale of a watershed, a small region or an agrarian system. Positive or negative externalities can be integrated, for example to take into account Carbon sequestration values from tree crops or pollution effects. A “hazard” module enables testing of all changes in prices (input and outputs) and in production in order to test different hypotheses in the framework of a prospective analysis.

The aim of using “Olympe” is to improve farmers’ understanding of their own situation, of their socio-economic context and its impact on their decisions in addition to providing orientations for policy makers by testing scenarios of future change. Olympe can be used in a variety of situations and with different methodological approaches: comparison of cropping

5 INRA = Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, IAMM = Institut Agronomique Montpellier Méditerranée. The original and main designer of the software is J.M. Attonaty, from INRA-ESR.


169

systems, farming system economics and resources management (“advice on farm management”6), prospective analysis, regional approach and even as a “role playing game”7 (Penot et al., 2003).

Why model farming systems? A model has two main roles: a figurative role of representation of systems (the functioning) and a demonstrative role (possibilities and strategies). Combining these two roles provides an explanatory model whose function is to represent specific phenomena deriving from general phenomena (management, accountancy etc.) as a function of the local conditions that characterise farming systems. (Nouvel, 2002). The need to understand farming systems as a “productive system” and the logic behind technical choices recalls the systemic approach (Badouin, 1985).The overall objectives of using Olympe are i) to identify smallholders’ constraints and opportunities in a rapidly changing environment to enable the adoption of new cropping systems or any other organisational innovation, ii) to understand farmers’ strategies, their capacity for innovation and their ability to adapt to a changing economy, to price crises and technological change, iii) to provide a tool to understand the farmers’ decision making, to examine farming systems in their social and economic context (through a regional approach) and iv) to undertake prospective analysis and build scenarios based climatic risks, major climatic events such as “el Niño years” and the volatility of commodity prices. Building scenarios enables us to review the situation from a prospective standpoint and to analyse the robustness or resilience of the system that is being proposed. Data for analysis with Olympe should be discussed in partnership with the farmers concerned in order to validate scenarios and guarantee a high level of representativity. For instance, a network of selected representative farms can be monitored for several years to diagnose constraints and opportunities and to measure the impacts of technical change. One of the main outputs of such an approach is the assessment of the impact of technical alternatives or choices at the farming systems level from both an economic and environmental point of view. Olympe is fed with data from appropriate farming systems surveys and provides key information in terms of diagnosis and, later, in terms of prospective analysis. Agricultural sustainability is a major concern. The main issues concerning "ecological sustainability" are linked to the problem of degraded environment and fragile soils and, as a consequence, to fertility, biodiversity, and the protection of watersheds. Several cropping systems offer potential solutions to these problems: agroforestry practices and cropping systems with permanent vegetal cover, among others. Crop diversification and rapid technical change characterise the evolution of existing farming systems. The history of these innovations and innovation processes are key elements to analyse and understand and thus be in a position to make viable recommendations for development. The notion of “economic sustainability”, focuses on the profitability of specific technical choices: (margins analysis, income generation, return to labour and capital as a function of a specific activity, analysis of constraints-opportunities, etc.) from the point of view of farming systems, at the regional level and the “community level” where there are serious constraints with respect to land availability, as well as to access to capital and information. Analysis of farming systems and

6 “Conseil de gestion” in French. 7 The 2003 CIRAD seminar held in Montpellier on the methodological uses of Olympe revealed a wide range of possibilities from which we selected prospective analysis as the subject of this paper


170

knowledge about smallholders’ strategies in the different contexts are thus key elements that should be taken into account. Perennial crops in particular are subject to significant and sometimes very rapid changes in plantation/re-plantation strategies in pioneer and post-pioneer areas and these changes characterise farmers’ strategies through phases of investment, capital building, capital conservation, re-investment and possibly intensification or diversification or both. To ensure the adoption and appropriation of technology by smallholders is efficient, further research is required on innovation processes and technical change in general using socio-economic tools. Negotiations between stakeholders and a better knowledge of the relations between the State and farmers is essential if the effectiveness of future projects and development actions is to be ensured. One expected output is the identification of the conditions required to ensure future projects are more viable at the decision-making level. Another is valorisation of the ability of such a collaborative approach to anticipate problems (e.g. recurring negative phases of booms, drops in fertility/productivity due to over-exploitation, negative externalities, etc.), to propose viable alternatives (technical pathways or new organisational innovations, etc.) and to provide better support for technical choices made by decision makers with respect to agricultural policy. Olympe can be used at different scales, i.e. the local community, regional, national or international scale, depending on which stakeholders and which commodity is involved. Emphasis is placed on the farmer and on the other people directly involved in the farmers’ environment, including the government (development policies at the national level). The ‘Participatory approach’ and ‘Action–Research’ are essential components of the approach proposed by CIRAD partners. In addition to the Participatory or partnership approach and on-farm experimentation, tools for decision-making aid such as SIG, System multi-agents (SMA) and farming system modelling (Olympe) allow possible answers to be identified to important agricultural questions. Risk and hazard assessment through prospective analysis Faced with market uncertainties, price volatility and climatic hazards, most tree-crop farmers have developed diversification strategies. They may also have integrated local opportunities for specific crops, such as oil palm thanks to development schemes provided by private Estates providing.

The farmers’ main objectives in diversifying are the following :

- securing income (guaranteed minimum income, not a decrease in income) - improving living standards, - limiting risks (e.g. climatic risks) on production, food security, self-sufficiency and of

economic hazards on commodity prices, - obtaining better distribution of income throughout the year, - profiting from potential opportunities (or not missing them, which is another way of

looking at it!), - being less dependant on a single commodity in a world of globalisation, - acquiring property (patrimony), - valorising land that was not previously cropped,


171

- increasing knowledge and acquiring technical information to be in a better position to innovate

- increasing the sustainability of agricultural production in the medium or long term (see figure 1).

Prospective analysis can be used for different purposes: i) to test the impact of a commodity or of volatile prices of inputs , ii) to test the robustness of technical choices, iii) to define a financial or economical threshold beyond which profitability is too low or risks too high and to measure capital and credit requirement to change pathways, iv) to measure flows of inputs and outputs and v) to assess the impact of any decision on profitability, return to labour and return to investment. Historical records, data on prices, and agrarian history help identify possible scenarios.

Some instances are explored through the case of rubber farmers in Indonesia and Cambodia.

The example of Indonesian rubber farmers diversifying with oil palm

Smallholders have based their strategies on both intensification: moving from traditional jungle rubber to monoculture of improved agroforestry systems in Indonesia,, and on sustainability (risk limitation) and diversification (integration of new crops such as oil palm, pepper, etc.) [Penot, 2003 #1171].

Several hypotheses were based on the following main hypotheses (Penot et Hébraud, 2003):

1. Rubber and oil palm prices volatility: rubber prices varied between 0.5 and 2 US$/kg (a variation of 200 % between 1995 and 1998) while oil palm varied only by 100 %.

2. Effect of a commodity windfall thanks to a period of very good prices which has an impact on household expenses, financial return and investment capabilities; improvement in living conditions is the priority with an increase of 30 % in household expenditure, and the balance of available cash flow may then be invested in tree crops.


172

Figure 1: Definition of prospective scenarios:

Farming systems

Global context: - political - economic - social - ecological

Government institutions

Development projects

Markets

Consumers Donors

Scenario A: basic situation

Simulated scenarios

B C D…. - assessment of impact of an

innovation or of a decision on prices New technical proposals - Re-definition of agricultural policies - Impact on public policies - Proposals to donors, projects and extension/development agencies.

Re-negotiations


173

3 Global negative or positive effect on investment, replanting and diversification.

4 Effect of climatic events: one or two “el Niño” years in a 10-year period for instance: to measure risks and the robustness of technical choices

Figure 2 shows fluctuations in farmers’ annual net income as a function of different diversification strategies. Oil palm rapidly provides a significant improvement when rubber prices are low (2002). Such a trend would be far less significant when rubber prices recover in 2003.

Figure 2: Fluctuations/variations in farmers’ income for 10 different types of farms with

differing degrees of intensification (rubber) and diversification (oil palm).

Evolution des soldes sur 10 ans

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Années

So

lde (

K r

ou

pie

s)

Embaong mono Embaong SRAP

Embaong palmier Embaong palmier SRAP

Kopar palmier Kopar palmier monosendiriKopar palmier SRAP Kopar palmier SRAP RAS sendiri

Trimulia palmier Trimulia SRAP

Gradient of diversificati

traditional

Improved agroforestry

Oil palm


174

Figure 3 shows the effect on income of an average “el Niño” year in 2003 and how different types of farms recover differently depending on their degree of diversification. In this case, the impact of “El Niño” on yield is minus 30 % on annual crops, minus 10 % on rubber and oil palm with a secondary effect of minus 5 % in the second year for oil palm (recorded or observed in Sumatra).

Figure 3: Impact of an “el Niño year “ in 2003 on net annual income over a 10-year period.

The case of Cambodian farmers

The results presented here are taken from the report on a regional assessment of agriculture in Mimot district made in 2004 (L Feintrenie, 2004). The methodology was based on a survey of farm households. The exploratory survey enabled a typology to be constructed and representative farms were then selected. Further surveys allowed farming systems to be defined and analysed after modelling which was based on discussions with local farmers’ groups.

The Olympe software was used to analyse farming systems and implement prospective analysis through the creation of potential scenarios for the next 20 years based on current trends. This study resulted in proposals for development and research actions to the donor (AFD, Agence Francaise de Développement).

Kampong Cham province, in the East of Cambodia, is dedicated to the rubber industry. Mimot district is characterized by its red soil plateaux that have been planted with rubber since 1925. Nowadays the economy of this depends on the primary branch. Agriculture is represented by family farms, and the average area of a farm is between one and five hectares. A programme aimed at the development of rubber production in Cambodia is presently run by the Khmer Government with financial help from the AFD and scientific support from CIRAD and GRET; it is called ‘The Family rubber crop project’. The superintendent of this

El Nino year

Im p a ct d u p h é n o m è n e "El N iñ o " su r le s so ld e s d e s a g ricu l te u rs

- 4 00 0

- 2 00 0

0

2 00 0

4 00 0

6 00 0

8 00 0

1 0 00 0

1 2 00 0

20 0 1 2 00 2 20 0 3 2 00 4 20 0 5 20 0 6 20 0 7 20 0 8 20 0 9 20 1 0

A n n é e s

So

lde

(K

ro

up

ies

)

Emba o ng S RA P Emba o n g S RA P a lé a

Emba o ng p a lmie r S RA P Emba o n g p a lmie r S RA P a lé a

Eng ka y u p o iv re En gka y u p o iv re a léa

K o p ar pa lmie r S RA P RA S s e nd ir i K o p a r p a lmie r S RA P RA S s e n d ir i a lé a

Tr imu lia p a lmie r Tr imu lia p a lmie r a lé a


175

project is the Directorate-General of Rubber Plantations (DGRP), in partnership with the GRET for the selection of the candidate growers, and with the financial backing of the AFD (French Agency for Development). Other aims of the project are the re-establishment of old rubber zones, the establishment of new sites and agricultural diversification in rubber-production areas. Project actions target four districts of Kompong Cham province: Chamcar Loeu, Tbong Khmum, Damber and Mimot.

The main crops produced in the district of Mimot are cashew nuts, rubber, black pepper and fruits like durian-civet fruit and rambutan. The district environment is quite heterogeneous. Three kind of agrarian systems are observed at village level that depend pn relief and soil characteristics, access to market and the level of specialization of the farming system concerned. Within these groups, farming systems can be characterised by their particular combination of production units.

Figure 4s and 5 show the results of modelling (of different types of farming systems. Fig 4 shows differences in farmers’ income for 10 different types of farming systems under different crops for a period of 20 years. Periods of capitalisation and/or de-capitalisation occur highlighting periods when the farmer family cannot live only on its farming income which pave the way for off-farm activities. Figure 5 shows cumulated income for a period of 20 years for the same farming systems, and highlights capitalisation and debts processes which lead to a concentration of land tenure that favours the richest farms at the district scale, and which has been a relatively rapid since the end of the 1990s. The main consequence is a multiplication of no-land farmers since 1990 and the birth of forest clearing fronts in the district. The two figures show that the more diversified the farming system is, the higher the farmer’s income. But even more important than the link with crop diversification is the link with two particular crops: rubber and durian which are the most productive agricultural activities in Mimot district in terms of labour and of valorisation of the land. The results of modelling show that the development of rubber or planting durian should help build up a strong family agriculture in Mimot district on condition diversified activities are maintained on the farm. Meanwhile access to a rubber plantation with the current AFD project is the best way to secure long-term agricultural income.

In this regional assessment of the efficiency agricultural activity in terms of income, the Olympe software was very useful, firstly as a “formatted database tool ” enabling very rapid processing of economic data on farms, secondly for the analysis of changes in farming systems by providing a dynamic dimension to a originally static survey of farming systems with emphasis on ? (there’s a word missing here), and lastly, as an ideal tool for prospective studies and for testing scenarios of possible future changes in farming systems based on current trends.


176

Evolution of farmers’ income for 10 different types of

farming systems with various crops, above twenty

years

-900

100

1100

2100

3100

4100

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

Years

Farm

er'

s i

nco

me (

US

$/y

ear)

Figure 4: Differences in farmers’ income for 10 different types of farming systems with

various crops for a period of 20 years

Comparison of farmers' cumulated income for 10

different types of farming systems with various crops,

above twenty years

-5000

-3000

-1000

1000

3000

5000

7000

9000

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

Years

farm

ers

' cu

mu

late

d i

nco

me (

US

$/y

ear)

Figure 5: Comparison of the cumulated income of the same farmers

Less diversified farming systems

without Durian or Rubber

With Rubber

and Durian

With Durian

With Durian

With Rubber

and Durian

Less diversified farming systems

without Durian or Rubber


177

Conclusions

Understanding the dynamics of farming systems is a key factor in our ability to deal with changes in a very rapidly changing world and the characterization of farming systems can no longer provide only a static picture at a given date. Innovations and technical changes leading to new farming pathways are of primary concern to development stakeholders in the context of globalization, decentralization and privatization processes which have largely contributed to the reduction or even withdrawal of Government support from the agricultural and rural sector and consequently to the abandonment of services to farmers, except those provided by private operators such as plantation Estates. Modelling farming systems can be used (beside other uses such as role-playing or farming management counselling) as a prospective tool to build scenarios about potential farm pathways as a function of farmers’ constraints, opportunities and decision-making processes. It can also contribute to the definition of agricultural policies, recommendations, to ensuring the applicability of recommendations with respect to local constraints, to measuring impacts and targeting policies to fit the real situation faced by farmers.

This economic and very pragmatic approach should be combined with a detailed socio-economic approach based in particular on understanding how rural people learn and share experiences and evaluate their actions. FSM is a comprehensive tool to bridge the gap between farmers’ options and strategies and policy makers. The use of such a tool enables stakeholders, policy makers, the private sector, plantation Estates, credit operators, and traders to explore the domain of feasibility and reduce risks for all those involved, including farmers engaged in a process of development. References Badouin, R. (1985). Le développement agricole en Afrique tropicale. Paris., Cujas. Nouvel, P. (2002). Enquête sur le concept de modèle. Paris, PUF. Feintrenie, L. (2004). Diagnostic agraire du district de Mimot, province de Kompong Cham,

Cambodge. CNEARC ESAT 1. Montpellier, CNEARC: 69 p (hors annexes). Penot, E. (2003). Formation à l'utilisation du logiciel de modélisation des exploitations

agricoles " olympe ". Rapport de mission à Yaoundé (Cameroun)du 07 au 12 avril 2003. Montpellier, CIRAD TERA.

Penot, E., Deheuvels O, Attonaty JM, Le Grusse Ph. (2003). Modélisation des exploitation agricoles: les mutiples usages du logiciel Olympe., Montpellier,, CIRAD.

Penot, E., Hébraud C. (2003). Modélisation et analyse prospective des exploitations hévéicoles en Indonésie : Utilisation du logiciel Olympe pour la définition de scénarios d'évolution en fonction de choix techniques et des aléas. Modélisation des exploitation agricoles: les mutiples usages du logiciel Olympe., Montpellier, Septembre 2003.


178

Pathways out of rural poverty in marginal areas: The role of ‘INRM technologies’ in a dry sub-region of Syria

La Rovere Roberto, Turkelboom Francis, Aw-Hassan Aden, Bruggeman Adriana, Thomas Richard

CIMMYT Mexico, ICARDA Syria

Abstract The paper discusses the pathways that people living in developing areas undertake to escape poverty, with reference to the Khanasser valley case study, representative of marginal dry areas in Syria and beyond. The study is based on an integrated ex-ante assessment of technologies developed within an Integrated Natural Resources Management (INRM) approach by the Khanasser Valley benchmark project of ICARDA. These technologies are suited to local dry farming systems and have the potential to contribute to improving livelihoods and natural resources management. The study identifies the driving forces and dynamics behind change in local systems, and the key entry points through which technologies can contribute to poverty reduction. It comprehensively assesses their impact and the preconditions for their success, with a focus on diversification options that are targeted at poorer households. The study concludes with the implications for agricultural research of the diffusion of these technologies on multiple livelihood indicators and on the natural resource base, and highlights the policy and institutional conditions that need to be met for those technologies to become part of effective development strategies, and hence to ultimately have a positive impact on poverty.

Introduction and Objectives The main objective of this paper is to assess in an integrated way the impact of various technological options on people livelihoods and natural resources in a marginal dry area of Syria. Implications for development pathways and targeting of agricultural research to reduce rural poverty are discussed. Research can achieve impact if new technologies can be applied to comparable areas; the technological options developed and assessed for this marginal area for resource-stressed farmers are applicable to other similar dry areas. Marginal Areas: Definitions and Overarching Challenges Marginal areas are characterized by a high incidence of ‘marginal’ people having poverty as a common denominator, and having relatively homogeneous determinants of poverty (TAC, 1999). Marginal areas often have a low agricultural potential due to scarce rainfall, are ecologically sensitive with poor soils and steep slopes, have inadequate services and property rights, poor infrastructure, and are neglected by policy makers and agricultural research (Kuyvenhoven et al., 2004). The bio-physical conditions within these areas vary among and within farms, households diverse, and communities often heterogeneous. The Khanasser Valley is a marginal dry area situated in northwest Syria, characterized by biophysical problems (low fertility, soil salinity, unfavorable climate), extensive poverty and socio-economic constraints (distant markets, uncertain land tenure, small and fragmenting land holdings, low input / output ratios, and market marginalization). Main rainfed cereals are barley and wheat, often grown in rotation involving fallow. Main livestock enterprises are extensive sheep production, where animals interact with the cropping and feed system, intensive lamb fattening, and dairy production. There is an increasing presence of olives often grown on slopes, while cumin is an emerging cash crop.


179

The area has a low production potential because of low rainfall and wide climatic fluctuation with a high risk of drought. Local average rainfall is 200–250 mm per year. Poverty is extensive but would be higher without off-farm incomes from migration (La Rovere et al., forthcoming). The area may be defined as dryland rainfed mixed crop-livestock and pastoral farming system (Dixon et al., 2001; World Bank, 2002). Livelihoods Diversity in Marginal Dry Areas In the Khanasser Valley La Rovere et al. (forthcoming) found that the main household types are semi-landless laborers, agriculturists, and pastoralists. The agriculturists mostly integrate crops, fattening and waged labor; the laborers are semi-landless and mostly rely on off-farm earnings; and the pastoralists are extensive herders and migrate for wages. Most households living in the Khanasser area depend on earnings from sales of crops for less than one fourth of their total income, making off-farm labor and animal production their major sources of income. The average per capita income is $1–1.5/day. About 45% of people, including agriculturists and pastoralists with off-farm earnings, are relatively better off. The former can competitively engage in agriculture and access and adopt agricultural technologies. The poorest households, comprising about 30% of people, are the landless with livelihoods based on off-farm wages, often insufficient to allow them to emerge out of poverty. The pastoralists with only extensive herds in remote steppe areas are also among the poorest. Intermediate groups are the laborer households who have a combination of assets (land and/or family labor) that allows them to engage productively in agriculture, and comprise about 25% of all people. GIS-facilitated similarity analysis indicates that areas with bio-physical similarities to the Khanasser Valley exist in Syria, Jordan, Iran, and the Maghreb (De Pauw, 2003). Although Khanasser may be similar in terms of environmental marginality to other areas, livelihood strategies, constraints, and development pathways differ due to different socio-economic and political conditions. Local Pathways out of Rural Poverty Agricultural development pathways are defined as patterns of change in livelihood strategies (Pender, 2004) determined by local comparative advantages in agricultural potential, access to markets and infrastructure, population density, presence of local organizations and services, and the potentials and constraints linked to natural resource endowments. Various pathways exist by which people can improve their livelihoods. The presence of different types of rural people implies that different technologies are suitable for different endowments and that the enabling conditions differ between types. This diversity of options can lead to a variety of ecological and human impacts. The main responses of Khanasser households to the challenges of living in marginal areas are diversification of livelihood strategies, specialization in intensive activities (e.g. lamb fattening), out-migration, and exiting agriculture, frequent for those who cannot diversify, specialize, and remain competitive in farming and is the main strategy to escape poverty. Methodology and Materials The study comprised a sequence and combination of methods that include the: - Application of the concept of benchmark integrated research site (IRS) - A qualitative multi-level analytical framework - Links to a livelihood study on technologies and users (La Rovere et al., forthcoming) - An ex-ante comparative assessment of technologies (La Rovere and Aw-Hassan, 2005). The agricultural options considered in this study comprise both those related to traditional farming systems and those that are part of processes of diversification and intensification.


180

Technologies that turned out to be suitable emerged from a process of selection and innovation, which involved farmers, researchers, and other development stakeholders.

- Traditional options

o Extensive sheep production and technologies to improve productivity o New barley varieties selected by farmers and further developed and improved

using a farmer-breeding participatory approach o Wheat production with supplemental sprinkler and surface irrigation, to improve

rainfall water productivity o Dairy sheep production for consumption and for sale of surplus

- Diversification options

o Improved vetch production by selected drought-tolerant varieties to reduce production risks

o Improved management of rainfed cumin (a new cash crop) to stabilise and increase production and improve its marketing outcome

o Olive orchards cultivated on hill foot slopes, with water harvesting, to increase production and reduce irrigation that uses groundwater

o Barley intercrop with Atriplex shrubs to stabilise feed production, increase dry years biomass, and enhance protein content in sheep diets

o Barley production with application of the phosphogypsum amendment to improve soil fertility, increase and stabilize production in dry years

- Intensification options

o Lamb fattening, by using lower-cost feeds Khanasser Valley as an Integrated Research Site Khanasser Valley is one of the benchmark projects of the International Centre for Agricultural Research in Dry Areas (ICARDA). The objective of the project was to develop environmentally-friendly and livelihood-supporting agricultural options. The Context of Integrated Natural Resources Management The project applied an Integrated Natural Resources Management (INRM) approach to improve livelihoods, agro-ecosystem resilience, productivity and environmental services at different scales by integrating research into stakeholder-driven processes of adaptive management and innovation to solve complex real-world problems (Thomas, 2002). The purpose is to analyze the implications of technological and institutional options at various bio-physical and socio-economic levels. It is used to identify options for marginal areas that are feasible, ecologically sound, economically viable, and socially acceptable; to analyze the causes for success or failure of technologies at various levels, the impacts of technology adoption on natural resources, prioritize potential constraints to technology adoption, and generate alternative policy, technological and institutional options. Assessment of Linkages between Livelihoods and Agricultural Options A livelihoods study (La Rovere et al., forthcoming) was conducted to characterize the livelihood strategies of those living in the area, as well as to understand the role of enterprises and technologies within the context of the household economy:

- For whom and in which conditions and systems they represent feasible options, - To which capitals of rural people these technologies are contributing - How much they contribute to improved livelihoods by generating income, reducing risks

and vulnerability, and diversifying the opportunities for farmers.


181

Data Collection and Integration Data on the different technologies was collected by surveys (La Rovere et al., forthcoming) at the household, key informant, and community levels. Marketing, trade, and market access data as well as information on policy and institutions was collected by combining qualitative and quantitative approaches and multi-source policy, markets, and institutional analysis. 153 semi-detailed enterprise budgets at the farm household level and 84 detailed budgets on all main enterprises were collected by annual or multi-annual farm household surveys, and integrated with multi-level information gained through a multi-stakeholder participatory process of technology evaluation. Multi-annual enterprise data was gathered retroactively over the lifetime of the enterprises. Ex-ante Scenarios and Enterprise Feasibility Assessment Comparative static enterprise budget analysis was used to evaluate the feasibility of agricultural technologies and their future relevance for improved livelihoods. This analyzed the costs and benefits of alternative enterprises, clustering the positive and negative economic aspects of alternative options and estimating their relative profitability with or without the technology. The marginal rate of return (MRR) of yield-enhancing technologies was calculated as the ratio between the increased income with the technology and the cost incurred to acquire the technology, while for input-reducing (e.g. water saving, feed cost reducing technologies) it was calculated as the value of saved inputs over the technology costs. The net enterprise profits per hectare and MRR of different technologies were compared to assess their relative magnitude and opportunity costs versus alternative land uses and returns, over their intensity of use of different household capitals (human, financial, natural, etc.). Results The Dynamics of Livelihood Challenges and Opportunities Changes in social and ecological systems are driven by forces of a socio-economic and ecological nature. Livelihood challenges faced by people living in the Khanasser area and the pressures that affect their lives, assets and resources are condensed in the next Figure. Figure Ecological and social driving forces and system shifts in Khanasser area


182

M ig r a t io n fo r e m p lo y m e n t

T e c h n o lo g ic a l o r in s t i t u t io n a l e n t r y p o in t s

D e c l in in g jo bo p p o r t u n i t ie s

In c r e a s in g f a m i ly s iz e

D e c l in in g /c a p a n d / h a e a r n in g s

D e c r e a s in g n e t in c o m e s

In c r e a s in g l iv in g c o s t s

D r o u g h t

D e c l in in g p a s t u r e a n d n a t u r a l f e e d s

H ig h e r f e e d s c o s t

In c r e a s in g a n im a l p r o d u c t io n c o s t s

D e c l in in g h e r d s i z e ( e x te n s iv e )

D e c l in in g p r o d u c t iv i t y

S o i l f e r t i l i t y d e c l in e

W a t e rs a l in iz a t io n

G r o u n d w a te rd e c l in e

L a n d f r a g m e n t a t io n

In c r e a s in g f a r min p u t c o s t s

P o p u l a t i o nin c r e a s e

P o l ic y ( i . e . r a n g e

c u lt iv a t io n b a n )

W a t e r s h o r t a g e

In c r e a s in g S h e e p f a t t e n i n g

E c o lo g ic a l S o c io -e c o n o m ic P o l ic y a n d in s t i t u t io n a l

L e g e n d :

M ic r o - c r e d i t

W U E t e c h n o lo g ie s

Im p r o v e d c r o p p r o d u c t io n te c h s

M ic r o - c r e d i tL o w e r c o s t t e c h n o lo g ie s

R e d u c in g f e e d c o s ts

L o c a l jo b c r e a t io n

M ig r a t io n fo r e m p lo y m e n t

T e c h n o lo g ic a l o r in s t i t u t io n a l e n t r y p o in t s

D e c l in in g jo bo p p o r t u n i t ie s

In c r e a s in g f a m i ly s iz e

D e c l in in g /c a p a n d / h a e a r n in g s

D e c r e a s in g n e t in c o m e s

In c r e a s in g l iv in g c o s t s

D r o u g h t

D e c l in in g p a s t u r e a n d n a t u r a l f e e d s

H ig h e r f e e d s c o s t

In c r e a s in g a n im a l p r o d u c t io n c o s t s

D e c l in in g h e r d s i z e ( e x te n s iv e )

D e c l in in g p r o d u c t iv i t y

S o i l f e r t i l i t y d e c l in e

W a t e rs a l in iz a t io n

G r o u n d w a te rd e c l in e

L a n d f r a g m e n t a t io n

In c r e a s in g f a r min p u t c o s t s

P o p u l a t i o nin c r e a s e

P o l ic y ( i . e . r a n g e

c u lt iv a t io n b a n )

W a t e r s h o r t a g e

In c r e a s in g S h e e p f a t t e n i n g

E c o lo g ic a l S o c io -e c o n o m ic P o l ic y a n d in s t i t u t io n a l

L e g e n d :

M ic r o - c r e d i t

W U E t e c h n o lo g ie s

Im p r o v e d c r o p p r o d u c t io n te c h s

M ic r o - c r e d i tL o w e r c o s t t e c h n o lo g ie s

R e d u c in g f e e d c o s ts

L o c a l jo b c r e a t io n

The main social driving force that affects social and human capital is population growth. This has resulted in declining job opportunities; land fragmentation, seasonal migration of males for work, and feminization of agricultural labor. Declines in local opportunities in agriculture are also due to farming mechanization and limited labor intensive crops. The main bio-physical driving forces of a physical and natural type consist of:

• Low rainfall, mainly consisting of irregular rainfall leading to negative social impacts

• Degradation of rangelands due to grazing and cultivation contributed to the formulation of policies that banned cropping from steppe areas.

• Declining soil fertility in some arable areas and water and soil salinization, are processes of a bio-physical nature but are also due to human impacts on resources that affect the environment and productivity. This has increased total farming costs. Major consequences in terms of financial capital are decreases in real incomes and erosion of monetary and physical savings due to higher living and farming costs. The income left after meeting health and living costs is limited, and a disposable is available only to the agriculturists and to the pastoralist having off-farm earnings. Holistic Comparison of the Technologies The benefits of local options are discussed based on La Rovere and Aw-Hassan (2005). The quoted study reports the detailed analytical results and intensities of enterprises and technologies use of the different livelihood capitals invested in themError! Reference source not found.. Annual enterprises were compared with the average annuities of long term enterprises.


183

Financial Capital Use The annual field crops requiring the highest initial investment are irrigated wheat and cumin. Olive orchards on foot slopes require significant costs at the beginning of the multi-annual investment. The establishment of a lamb fattening business is the most expensive, making it an option that few can afford without external financial help. Barley requires relatively low initial costs, though the application of PG greatly increases costs. The net economic returns to invested capital are highest for irrigated cumin, rainfed vetch and wheat; are very modest in dry years for barley and negative for the Atriplex- -barley intercrop. The net return on the invested capital for lamb fattening is relatively low (18%) due to the considerable initial cost to purchase enough lambs to generate an economy of scale. The net profit generated by a fattening cycle, however, is very high. Natural resources use: water

In the Khanasser area, wheat was found to use large shares of total agricultural water and of groundwater abstraction, and to use water in less economically efficient ways than other local irrigated crops. Sheep fattening uses relatively little water, if considering only the water used by the lambs for drinking during the fattening cycle. Fattening, however, needs water to produce feeds and concentrates. Since these inputs are produced outside the Khanasser Valley area, the fattening business does not consume local groundwater but imports water in the form of feeds and therefore does not affect local water supplies. Natural resources use: grazing resources

Vetch, Atriplex, PG addition and irrigation to cereals, and improved barley varieties increase the forage biomass for the late spring and summer. As such, it represents a potential saving of the natural rangelands. Cumin and olives are neutral or have a slightly negative effect on grazing resources, as these crops usually replace barley or natural rangelands. The impact of lamb fattening on grazing resources is positive if feeds are imported. Semi-intensive fattening often make us of natural pastures during the spring and of crop-residue during summer. Their impact can be from slightly to very negative. Natural resources use: land and soil fertility

When we consider only the income from crop yield, the economic returns to land are highest for cumin and wheat and lowest for olive trees. On the other hand, olive orchards have the great benefit of capitalizing the value of marginal sloping lands, as it can rarely be productively cultivated with field crops. As lamb fattening business is not land intensive (since it uses only small backyard areas), it has a very high return to land. Enterprises with a positive effect on soil fertility are vetch (nitrogen fixation, improved soil quality), applications of PG (improved soil structure, increased phosphorus content) and olive orchards with water harvesting structures (soil conservation). Human resources use: labour

The net economic returns over labor, seasonal labor demand of different enterprises, and supply of labor on-farm are indicators of likely impacts of a wider diffusion of enterprises in terms of local generation of employment. Not only technologies that reduce labor costs and increase labor productivity are suited for marginal areas, but also labor intensive ones that generate employment (Kuyvenhoven et al., 2004). This is of relevance mainly for the landless laborers. Enterprises such as olive production can be labor intensive. Vetch and cumin need hired labor at times of intense demand, contributing to generate employment. Relevance of technologies for livelihoods and poverty reduction

The different enterprises and options discussed in section of the paper are relevant in different ways and to different extents to the various typologies of people living in marginal dry areas. The preconditions that these enterprises and technological options need to meet in


184

order to become effective in benefiting rural people are given in the Annex, together with implications and likely impacts of their potential diffusion.

Relevance for the different livelihood

typologies

Enterpr

ise

Technology

Currently

Potentially

Conditions that the options need to meet in order to become

effective…

Implications of the diffusion of the enterprise and

technology:

Main likely impacts of diffusion of technology on:

Olives

Water harvesting (Improved management)

AG AG LB-F

Enhanced marketability and competitiveness

- Less costs for irrigation water - Expansion of olive orchards - Fuel subsidies, water pricing

- Production, food consumption - Seasonal labour demand - Aggregate groundwater use

New varieties (by PPB)

AG LB

LB

PBB process institutionalized

- Expansion of PBB varieties,

- Feed (barley) availability - Incomes, risk reduction

Phosphogypsum AG (LB-F)

LB-F

Institutional solution to transport phosphogypsum

- Transport, fertilisers subsidy - Wider expansion of PG

- Feed (barley) availability - Incomes, soil fertility - Adoption of the technology

Barley

Atriplex intercrop

(AG) AG (LB-F)

Participatory extension pathways are developed Communal institutions to avoid conflicts

- Expansion of Atriplex intercrop - Changing access to grazing areas - Increased credit availability

- Feed (grazing) availability in dry years - Adoption of the technology

Cumin Improved management

AG AG LB

Marketability enhanced Marketing information available

- Expansion of cumin - Fertilisers subsidy - Output price fluctuations

- Incomes, land use

Vetch

Improved management (New varieties)

AG AG LB

Local institution for low-cost seed delivery

- Expansion of vetch - Incomes, feed availability, soil fertility

Wheat

Irrigation technologies (New varieties)

AG AG LB

Micro-credit for water use efficient irrigation

- Expansion of irrigation technologies - Fuel subsidies (for pumping water) - Water pricing or subsidy

- Groundwater resource, land use

Lamb fattening

Lower cost feeds

AG AG (LB) PA

Pro-poor start-off strategies Marketability enhanced, information Suitable credit schemes in place

- Expansion of fattening - Export regulations, feed subsidies - Increased credit availability

- Incomes, feed demand - Adoption of technology by poor farmers

Extensive sheep

Animal health technologies Strategy to incr. productivity

All animal

- holding household

s

LB-H

PA

Technologies for lower cost feeds, and barley related technologies in place

- Changing access to grazing areas

- Grazing resources

Dairy production

Improved institutions for dairy production systems

(LB-H)

PA

PA

Enhanced marketing system Micro-credit for post-harvest technology Post-harvest institutions

- Expansion of dairy production - Technology to store and process milk - Subsidy or increase in feed prices

- Income, nutrition

Household livelihood typologies: AG: Agriculturists, LB: Labourers (LB-F: Farmers, LB-H: Herders), PA: Pastoralists.


185

In the Khanasser area it is mostly the agriculturists who frequently benefit, directly and indirectly, from ongoing research by diversifying into the various enterprises and who can afford the fattening business. While many of them earn off-farm wages, relatively few of them are forced to migrate or exit agriculture. The poorer groups also have the potential to benefit of broad-based growth stirred by research spillover of increasing labor demand from technology-induced productivity growth, of more labor-absorbing value-added technologies, and of lower input prices (La Rovere et al., forthcoming) although this often occurs indirectly or only in the longer run. Laborer households that can count on enough arable land and family labor are among the next more likely beneficiaries and direct targets of research aimed at reducing poverty. These households, which include a large share of poor people, tend to diversify in less capital intensive enterprises such as barley. They benefit only moderately from extensive animal production technologies, dairy production (by consuming milk), cumin production (via seasonal off-farm work), and improved techniques to produce feeds (e.g. vetch, Atriplex-barley intercrop). Since the pathways to improve their livelihoods are based on off-farm earnings, they can remain competitive in agriculture if the enabling conditions that allow them to benefit of agricultural options exist (see Annex Table). Most of the pastoralists and laborers with livelihoods based on remittances and with scarce animals, land, and financial assets are, de facto, excluded from the direct benefits of agricultural research. Yet they may benefit indirectly from other technologies, such as those that stabilize barley production, improve extensive animal production and reduce risks, and from the employment spillovers that are generated in rural labor markets by improvements due to adopting research outputs. Conclusions and Implications People living in marginal dry areas have limited agricultural options. This is reflected by the dominance of traditional farming systems (i.e. barley and sheep) present in the study area. Few options are accessible, affordable, acceptable, ecologically sound, profitable, and therefore suitable for households in marginal areas. These options contribute to:

−−−− A more efficient use of water, to preserve ground water mainly during drought: water harvesting technologies, water use efficient irrigation, drought-resistant crop varieties.

−−−− Reversing the declines in biomass and pasture degradation, by increasing the reliance on better feeding strategies and local production of lower cost feed.

−−−− Counteracting the decline in job opportunities by the spread of labour intensive technologies, as alternatives to off-farm waged migration.

−−−− Buffering the volatility of farm incomes by yield-stabilizing technologies, access to market information, improved post-harvest technologies, diffusion of rainfed cash crops.

−−−− Improving nutrition, food diversity, and health and lowering food expenditure by the diffusion of dairy, fruit and oil, and vegetables on-farm production. Based on the results of this study, interventions that can lead to positive changes in the livelihoods of poor farmers in marginal dry areas of Syria comprise a portfolio of options emerging from this project, coupled with measures to ensure their feasibility, relevance, and adoptability by different target users under different conditions (see Annex


186


typologies

Enterpr

ise

Technology

Currently

Potentially

Conditions that the options need to meet in order to become

effective…


technology:


Olives


AG AG LB-F





AG LB

LB





LB-F




Barley

Atriplex intercrop

(AG) AG (LB-F)





AG AG LB



- Incomes, land use

Vetch


AG AG LB



Wheat


AG AG LB




Lamb fattening

Lower cost feeds

AG AG (LB) PA




Extensive sheep


All animal

- holding household

s

LB-H

PA



- Grazing resources

Dairy production


(LB-H)

PA

PA



- Income, nutrition



187

Agricultural research can help in promoting and catalyzing diversification, by identifying options and practices that improve labor productivity, increase employment, enhance the natural resource base (Kuyvenhoven et al., 2004). Diversification can help households in becoming more resilient to the changing conditions of market demand. Most technologies are appropriate for the ‘agriculturalist’ households with sufficient land and labor resources. Although they are relatively poor, they are not the poorest section of Khanasser Valley. ‘Laborer’ households who get most income from off-farm work will benefit less of these technologies, as they have limited land and capital and as regular migration makes it difficult to follow agricultural activities. However, poor farmers who have sufficient land and labor could also benefit from the concerned technologies, if they are given sufficient attention to their bottlenecks in adopting the concerned technologies. Unlike many Green revolution areas where a high degree of homogeneity facilitated the spread of modern varieties, for marginal dry areas a ‘new’ Green revolution that does not heavily depend on external inputs but combines genetic resistant, nitrogen-fixating crops, tillage and water practices for drought resistance, and context-specific biotechnology innovations can boost the locally feasible options. Though these investments yield lower rates of return compared with other areas, the combination of traditional, alternative, and emerging options may yield higher returns for marginal lands than earlier technology did. References De Pauw, E., 2003 How similar are the CWANA and Northern Mediterranean regions to

Khanasser?, Technical note, ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria Dixon, J, A. Gulliver and D. Gibbon, (2001) ‘Farming systems and poverty: Improving

farmers’ livelihoods in a changing world’, FAO & World Bank, Rome, Italy & Washington, DC, USA

Kuyvenhoven, A., Pender, J., Ruben, R., 2004. Development strategies for less-favored areas. Food Policy 29 (4), p. 295-302

La Rovere, R., Aw-Hassan, A., 2005. Ex-ante assessment of agricultural technologies in marginal dry areas: The Khanasser Valley case, Syria. Integrated Natural Resource Management Technical Research Report Series n. 6, ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria (in press)

La Rovere R., Aw-Hassan A., Turkelboom F., Thomas R. (forthcoming) Characterizing rural livelihoods to better target research to poverty: The case of the dry marginal areas of Syria. Development and change

Pender, J. 2004. Development pathways for hillsides and highlands: some lessons from Central America and East Africa. Food Policy 29 (4), 339-367

TAC, 1999. Reducing poverty through cutting edge science: CGIAR priorities for marginal lands. SDR/TAC:IAR/99/12, Washington D.C., 20433, USA

Turkelboom, F.; Thomas, R.; La Rovere, R.; Aw-Hassan, A.; 2004. An integrated natural resources management framework for coping with land degradation in dry areas. In: Ecosystem-based Assessment of Soil Degradation to Facilitate Land Users’ and Land Owners’ Prompt Actions: 2-7 June 2003, Adana, Turkey. p. 91-109 (En). Zdruli, P. Steduto, P. Kapur, S. Akca, E. (Eds.). IAM, Bari, Italy, pp 456

World Bank, 2002. Reaching the rural poor: a rural development strategy for the Middle East and North Africa region. Washington, USA www.worldbank.org/ruralstrategy

Following Page: Table: Relevance of technologies for different people, enabling conditions for improved livelihoods, and implications


188


typologies

Enterprise

Technology

Currently Potentially

Conditions that the options need to meet in order

to become effective…


technology:


Olives


AG AG LB-F





AG LB

LB





LB-F




Barley

Atriplex intercrop

(AG) AG (LB-F)





AG AG LB



- Incomes, land use

Vetch


AG AG LB



Wheat


AG AG LB




Lamb fattening

Lower cost feeds

AG AG (LB) PA




Extensive sheep


All animal - holding household

s

LB-H

PA



- Grazing resources

Dairy production


(LB-H)

PA

PA



- Income, nutrition



189

Zero Tillage: Another Revolution in Third World

A.P. Singh and S.K.Choudhary

Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur (CG) India

Abstract In general, it has been observed that benefit cost ratio of farm business is either constant or decreasing despite of the fact that most of the efficiently managed farms, irrespective to size of holding and country, are harvesting maximum possible yields of various crops. Upon critical analysis of the reasons responsible for constant or meager benefit cost ratio is the steep price hike of agricultural inputs mainly farm labor wages, energy and inputs like fertilizer, seeds etc as against marginal increase in the prices of agricultural produce. This might be due to over all increase in production, surplus granaries and their slower disposal and above all competitive market world over. In order to overcome this alarming situation, it is imperative to reduce the cost of production with similar or enhanced levels of productivity per unit area. This can be done by adoption/ inclusion of new technologies through which fuel energy and other input can be minimized or optimized. One of the classical examples in this regard is inclusion of zero-tillage technique to reduce the over loaded bills of energy world over. Therefore, the rate of acceptance of this technique is much more higher than any other technology in agriculture at the moment. In this study, zero tillage technique was adopted at Instructional farm of Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India and energy saving up to 78 per cent was obtained in single planting season only without any adverse effect on productivity of wheat, linseed and mustard during 2004-05. Similarly, it enhanced the benefit- cost ratio to the tune of 14.58, 31.70 and 24.65 per cent in wheat, linseed and mustard, respectively, as compared to conventional tillage system. Improvement in soil health and environments are the added advantages of zero tillage in long term basis. Thesse advantages are equally important for sustainability in farm business.

Introduction Soil is a non-renewable resource and it is available in limited quantities. The results of exploiting agricultural system are evident in those regions where the soil is cultivated intensively and continuously, without considering soil degradation caused by soil preparation under hot/humid conditions. Rapid depletion of soil fertility and non-sustainable land use particularly in developing countries is both the cause and consequence of widespread poverty. Despite of tremendous progress in agricultural sciences especially in genetics and plant breeding, fertilization, plant protection and management, farm machinery, there is a clear tendency of narrowing of benefit-cost ratio of farming business. Mainly, owing to growing cost of agricultural production system. In the modern agriculture, the yield of different crops has reached to its maximum in most of the efficiently managed farms. Still the benefit-cost ratio has not been swelled up to the expectations. A critical analysis is given in Fig. 1 where the trend of increase in prices of three most crucial resources as energy, farm labor and inputs like fertilizer and pesticides vs increase in support price of produce especially rice clearly shows the disparity between the output per unit of input. More clearly, the increase in cost of fuel energy, farm labor and fertilizer including pesticides was to the tune of 45, 19 and 16 per cent, respectively, in last five years as against the meager increase in support price of rice to the tune of 6 per cent only in corresponding period. The consequence of this imbalanced increase in output vs input is causing social conflict especially in developing communities.


190

Figure 1. Price hike trends of urea, fuel, farm labor and support price in last five years

Sustainable agriculture is defined as establishing high, lasting and economic soil productivity, without damaging the soil and environments, improving quality of life. Definitions of sustainability that consider only one dimension i.e. soil fertility are insufficient, hence, ecological, social and economic dimensions must always be considered. Presently, zero tillage system has been considered to be another revolution in third world towards the achievable three-dimensional sustainability in agriculture. Zero tillage system offers numerous advantages that conventional tillage system cannot match. Inclusion of zero tillage system in the current mechanized agriculture will combat the monocropping in rainfed areas, unavoidable negative effects of intensive and repeated soil tillage in tropics and sub-tropics on organic matter content, soil erosion, soil structure, soil moisture, water infiltration, soil flora and fauna and losses of nutrients results in diminishing yields over time and in productivity losses of soil which leads to poor soil and farmers. As a matter of facts, farming communities are least interested in long-term advantages or disadvantages due to inclusion or deletion of any new or old technologies on soil, environment and ecology, but, are interested in short-term economic gains. Therefore, in order to maintain and improve the benefit -cost ratio of farming community and achieve a sustainable agriculture in tropics and subtropics, it is necessary to stop existing practice of intensive and repeated soil tillage. Zero-tillage method of crop establishment not only increases the benefit-cost ratio by reducing the cost of production as a short-term gain but also improves the various soil properties, environments and ecology in long-term. Therefore, keeping all above in view, an endeavor was made to alleviate energy consumption of farmers for comfortable benefit-cost ratio in short-term and sustainability of agriculture in long-term.

4.0

4.5

5.0

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Price (

Rs./kg)

Urea

15

20

25

30

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Pri

ce

(R

s./

lite

r)

Fuel

60

65

70

75

80

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Wages (

Rs./ d

ay)

Farm

labour

.

500

525

550

575

600

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Pri

ce

(R

s./

10

0 k

g p

ad

dy)

Support

price

.


191

Methodology Yield of paddy and soybean grown in rainy season and wheat, sunflower, chickpea, linseed, mustard grown in winter season have reached to its maximum at Instructional Farm of Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India. However, the benefit-cost ratio, despite of maximum production, is either stable or shrinking mainly due to imbalance escalation in the prices of fuel energy, inputs like fertilizer and pesticide and wages of farm labor as against increase in support price. With the objective to raise the benefit-cost ratio over existing one from the same cropping system, equipments and other resources, strategic inclusion / replacement of technologies were taken into consideration to minimize expenses on (i) fuel energy, (ii) labor and (iii) nutrient. Among these three practices, zero tillage technique of sowing was adopted three years back on 2.0 ha area after the harvest of rainy season paddy. The crops of wheat, soybean and mustard were sown with this technique and were repeated second year also. The results were encouraging as the yield was at par to the crops sown with conventional tillage. Considering the results of two year, almost one third of the farm area was put under this technique. Table 1: Various crops established with different tillage methods during 2004-05

Crops Conventional tillage Minimum tillage Zero tillage

Wheat 4.0 ha 4.0 ha 4.0 ha

Linseed 1.0 ha 1.0 ha 0.5 ha

Mustard 1.0 ha - 3.0 ha

Previous crop( rainy season) under conventional and zero tillage was paddy and under minimum tillage, it was soybean.

The soil where minimum and zero tillage technique was used for wheat and linseed was deep black clay soil (vertisol) having 8.2 pH and low in organic carbon and available N, medium in available phosphorus and rich in available K. In variance, the soil where mustard was sown with zero tillage technique was sandy-loam (inceptisol), neutral in reaction, low in organic carbon and nitrogen, medium in phosphorus and potassium content. In conventional tillage, ploughing was done twice with nine-tine tiller, followed by two harrowing. Sowing was done with seed-cum-fertilizer drill. In all above operations starting from field preparation to sowing, a total of 14 hours running of 35 H.P. tractor having an average consumption of 4 liters HSD per hour was recorded. In case of minimum tillage, where soybean was the previous crop, the same tractor followed by sowing did harrowing twice with disc harrow. A total of eight hours running of tractor with similar rate of fuel consumption / hr was recorded under minimum tillage. However, no field preparation was performed in case of zero tillage. Sowing was done with zero till seed-cum-fertilizer drill. A total of three hrs of running of similar tractor was noted with similar trend of fuel consumption. Recommended doses of N: P: K and seed rate were used for all the crops under all three methods of sowing. A three hours come-up irrigation through sprinkler was given to the crops sown under conventional and minimum tillage practice, whereas only 1½ hrs sprinkler was given to crop sown under zero tillage method as the residual moisture was higher in fields where zero till was adopted than conventional and minimum tillage sowing of various crops. Sprinkler was given immediately after sowing under conventional and minimum tillage but in zero till sowing, sprinkler was started after two days of sowing as the seed in conventional tillage and minimum tillage was in dry zone but in zero till sowing, seed was in moist zone. All the other operations were similar for all the methods of sowing.


192

Results and Discussion 1. Growth and Yield Attributes Method of crop establishment marginally influenced the growth and yield attributes of all the three crops (Table-2). Values of number of tillers or branches plant -1 and test weight were higher under zero tillage method followed by minimum tillage except tillers plant -1 in wheat. However, in case of wheat, number of tillers plant-1 was slightly higher under minimum tillage than conventional and zero tillage but test weight of wheat was highest under zero tillage as recorded in case of linseed and mustard. Similar findings on test weight have also been reported by Kumar and Yadav (2005). Table2: - Influence of various tillage operations on number of tillers/branches plant

-1 and

test weight of different winter season crops

Conventional tillage

Minimum tillage Zero- tillage Crops

No. of tillers/branch

es plant -1

Test weight,

g

No. of tillers/branche

s plant -1

Test weight,

g

No. of tillers/branch

es plant -1

Test weight, g

Wheat 4.87 38.2 4.92 39.0 4.83 40.20

Linseed 5.84 6.70 5.82 6.73 6.29 6.88

Mustard 4.59 5.66 - - 5.70 6.01

2. Energy Consumption and Seed Yields Establishment of winter season crops by zero tillage method reduced the energy consumption remarkably over conventional method of crop establishment. Seed and straw yield of wheat obtained under conventional tillage was marginally higher than minimum and zero tillage method owing to higher number of tillers plant-1. However, linseed and mustard performed better than wheat under zero tillage and gave 9.67 and 7.36 per cent, respectively, higher grain yield than conventional method of crop establishment. Similar trend was also recorded for straw yield of all the three crops. Higher yields of linseed and mustard under zero tillage were mainly due to higher number of branches plant-1 and test weight. The yield of all the three crops indicated that repeated tilling is not essential for harvesting higher seed yields. Further, the reduction in energy consumption due to shifting from conventional tillage to minimum tillage to zero tillage was conspicuous and was to the tune of 43 and 78 per cent lesser in minimum and zero tillage methods than the energy required in conventional tillage (Table-3). Similar findings have also been reported by the Directorate of Wheat Research, Karnal, India (2003-04). Reduction in energy consumption to above mentioned tune clearly indicated the drastic reduction in operational hours of farm machinery, which directly leads to long lasting of machinery.


193

Table 3: Influence of various tillage operations on seed yield of various crops and energy

consumption in 2004-05

Crops

Conventional tillage Minimum tillage Zero tillage

Wheat 2.21 t ha-1 2.20 t ha-1 2.18 t ha-1

Linseed 0.50 t ha-1 0.50 t ha-1 0.48 t ha-1

Mustard 0.78 t ha-1 - 0.85 t ha-1

Energy consumed (Mjha-1) 3180.80 1817.60 681.6

3. Benefit-Cost Ratio The benefit- cost ratio of all the crops was highest under zero tillage followed by minimum tillage whereas lowest was under conventional tillage (Table-4). The increase in benefit- cost ratio under zero tillage was to the tune of 14.6, 31.7 and 24.7 per cent over conventional tillage, respectively, for wheat, linseed and mustard. This remarkable increase in benefit- cost ratio under zero tillage was owing to drastic reduction in the consumption of costliest single agricultural input i.e. fuel. Table 4:- Effect of establishment methods on Benefit- cost ratio of various winter seasons

crops

Wheat Linseed Mustard Parameters

CT MT ZT CT MT ZT CT ZT

Tillage cost, Rs.ha-1 2400 1000 NIL 2400 1000 NIL 2200 NIL

Cost of sowing, Rs.ha-1 600 600 800 600 600 800 600 800

Other common inputs 10400 10400 10400 6000 6000 6000 8000 8000

Grain yield t ha-1 2.21 2.20 2.18 0.56 0.56 0.62 0.88 0.95

Straw yield t ha-1 3.53 3.52 3.27 0.88 0.86 0.98 2.68 2.96

Gross income Rs, ha-1 22008 21918 21582 10080 10080 11160 17600 19000

Cost of production Rs ha-1

13400 12000 11200 9000 7600 6800 10800 8800

Net income Rs ha-1 8608 9918 10382 1080 2480 4360 6800 10200

Benefit cost ratio 1.64 1.82 1.92 1.12 1.32 1.64 1.62 2.15

Apart from instant economic gains due to inclusion of zero tillage technique, long-term advantages of zero tillage on soil health and environments have also been reported elsewhere (Derpsch,1999; Shoran et.al.,2004, Khan,2004 and Kumar and Yadav,2005).

Conclusion It is concluded that those agricultural farms, which have already attained the peak in productivity, must think of alleviating cost of production per unit area without sacrificing the existing levels of productivity just by inclusion of new technologies capable to reduce expenses on energy and other agricultural inputs. Zero tillage is one of the efficient technologies, which directly can reduce the consumption of energy up to 78 per cent ha-1 during one crop season only. Similarly, this technology may increase the ultimate concern of farmers i.e. benefit- cost ratio up to 32 per cent over the existing benefit- cost ratio. At the same time, other indirect benefits of zero tillage on soil health and environment may also be enjoyed in long-term without any extra expenditure.


194

Thus, the benefit- cost ratio in farm business may keep on swelling constantly despite of continuous increase in the prices of agricultural inputs especially ever increasing cost of fuel world over. References Annual Report, 2004. Wheat under various tillage options in rice-wheat system. Directorate

of wheat research, Karnal, India Derpsch Rolf, 1999.New paradigms in agricultural production. ISRO-INFO EXTRA, Vol.4. Khan, SRA. 2004. Benefits of zero tillage technology. DAWN-Business, 2004. The DAWN

group of Newspapers. Shoran.J,Sharma,R.K.and Tripathi,S.C.2004. Wheat: New varieties and production .The

Hindu, Survey of Indian Agriculture, 2004. Kumar,Ramesh and Yadv,D.S. 2005.Effect of zero tillage and minimum tillage in

conjunction with nitrogen management in wheat (Triticum aesivum) after rice (Oryza sativa). Indian journal of Agronomy 50(1):54-57.


195

How Biodiversity relates to poverty, conceptual framework design to support policy making

Tonnie Tekelenburg and Jan Joost Kessler

Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and AIDEnvironment, The Netherlands

Abstract There is no simple relationship between the Millennium Development Goal (MDG1) poverty and hunger and environmental degradation and biodiversity (MDG7). The discussion on these relationships is characterised by several generalisations, some of these may be called ‘myths’. This paper explores an overall framework for global analysis by the determination of types of land use, degradation pathways and a small number of constellations of factors focussing on root causes and actors involved. Three states of land use intensity were determined on the basis of the analysis of 9 case studies: harvesting (gathering, hunting and fishing), extensive agricultural and intensive production systems. These land use states may be stable and show gradual transitions, when societies develop and population increases gradually. Economic growth increases at the cost of biodiversity loss. There have been and there are processes of unsustainable change characterised by rapid and irreversible biodiversity depletion linked to increased poverty. We classified the factors of unsustainable change into three constellations (mechanisms) that result in poverty increase and biodiversity loss: poverty or livelihood driven, capital driven and policy driven. Trigger events such as armed conflicts, civil war, collapse of prices, or a natural catastrophe may accelerate the above mentioned mechanisms. The mechanisms may interact and reinforce each other and may occur alongside each other in different land use states. Thus, a typology was developed of 9 possible cells, characterised by 3 different land-use states and 3 different underlying mechanisms. Central in the framework is the delivery of goods and services from ecosystems and its biodiversity with its consequences for human well-being. In order to obtain potential ecosystem services investment of labour and capital in the “production cycle” is required. The access to and the quality of natural resources in combination with the access to and quality of capital resources (including labour) determines to a large extent the biodiversity – poverty relation as well as main characteristics of the production system. The delivery of one ecosystem service may, however, produce negative side effects on other ecosystem services (the degradation feed-back loop on the natural resource base). We conclude that classifying poverty-biodiversity situations on the basis of land use states based on biodiversity dependence and production intensity, and on the basis of three mechanisms of unsustainable change, is a first step towards better understanding and design of policy solutions and monitoring indicators. Further case study analysis should generate field-based evidence of the components of the conceptual model and the most important factors to monitor. We suggest a first list of factors that should be quantified in the framework: population density and growth; income and income distribution; corruption index; access to technology, capital, markets, and to natural resources; naturalness and brittleness of ecosystems; nutrition cycle and erosion; food, water and energy supply as well as hunger and health risks.

Introduction Biodiversity Biological diversity, or biodiversity, refers to the variety and variability among the world’s living organisms and ecological complexes (UNEP, 1994). Biodiversity is considered at three levels of biological organisation: genes, species and ecosystems. A distinction can be made between biodiversity in relatively natural ecosystems (wild biodiversity) and in human land-use systems (agro-biodiversity).


196

Biodiversity is currently deteriorating at an unprecedented rate as a result of continuing habitat loss, fragmentation, pollution and climate change. The rate of loss eventually causes the extinction of species (MEA 2005b). According to the Convention of Biological Diversity’s (CBD), the key process of biodiversity loss is characterized by the decrease in abundance of many species and the increase in the abundance of a few other –opportunistic- species due to human activities. Species extinction is a last step in a process of degradation. In order the process of declining mean abundance of the original species, composite indicators have been proposed Under the CBD. Two of these are the Natural Capital Index (NCI) (Ten Brink, 2000; Ten Brink et al 2000) and the Living Planet Index (Loh, 2002). The NCI indicator determines the remaining fraction of biodiversity by the mean abundance of (a selection of) species expressed as a percentage relative to the mean abundance of (a selection of) species in original or pristine situations. Natural Capital (expressed in the biodiversity indicator NCI) decreased to about 70% from pre-industrialized times up to now, which means that on average the mean abundance of species is reduced to 70% percent of the original (Alkemade et al., in prep.). At the moment, between 10 and 50% of well-studied higher taxonomic groups are under threat (Bailie et al. 2004). If biodiversity loss continues, a remaining value of 64% is projected in 2030 (UNEP 2002; MNP 2005). On the basis of available empirical evidence, biodiversity decline proceeds in parallel with land-use change gradients (Alkemade, in press), starting by selective harvesting and ending by conversion to other (mainly agricultural) purposes (Reidsma et al in press). In this process of change, two types of biodiversity change occur concurrently: � A decline of area, due to conversion of natural ecosystems into other land-use; � A decline of ecosystem quality due to processes of degradation (e.g. including

fragmentation, exploitation, selective cutting, etcetera). Human well-being and poverty The most well-known and formal definition of poverty focuses on income. This parameter is measurable by monetary incomes or consumption, at different levels of aggregation (e.g. household surveys or national income statistics). Income poverty is most severe where a combination exists of both a low level of human development (in absolute terms) and a negative economic trend over 1990s (in relative terms). Using these two criteria has lead to priority setting of countries in terms of poverty (Millennium Project 2004a). The monetary interpretation was broadened to non-monetary income and consumption, which plays an important role in subsistence economies, with goods that do not enter the formal economy. Recently, however, it has become popular to extend the definition of poverty to other, non-material aspects of human well-being. This reflects increasing insights in basic needs of people other than monetary incomes, and also in the causes of poverty. The poverty - well-being interface has thus expanded as follows (Angelsen and Wunder, 2003): � Monetary income and consumption � Non-monetary income and consumption � Nutrition, health and food security � Other basic needs such as education � Empowerment, control and security or vulnerability � Freedom of choice and enhanced identity.


197

Humphrey (2003) identified two major causes of economic poverty: - The human capital transition measured as total fertility rate (TFR) - The industrial transition measured as the level of integration in global markets.

Poverty traps as a result of above causes (population growths leads to poverty and poverty results in a high TFR for example) can be found at locations with the following characteristics: isolated geography (small and island countries vulnerable to climatic shocks, water stress and natural disasters, conflict, misgovernance, social exclusion, diseases, trade system barriers, and debt. Hunger is defined as chronic and local under nourishment, and has been found to be correlated with GDP per capita, the GINI coefficient and population density. Hunger is also correlated with productivity of the land, which may be low due to land degradation or marginal conditions. In 1990 19.8% of the world population suffered from under nourishment, which is somewhat around 850 million people (SOFI, 2003). Today the Millennium project of the United Nations states that hunger continues a global tragedy (www.unmillenniumproject.org). Its elimination requires a concerted and persistent worldwide effort. Sun-Saharan Africa is loosing the fight against hunger (WHO 2003). CIESIN (2005) produced a global map of hunger hotspots concentrated in Africa and Asia. The 5-capital approach to poverty defines five types of assets determining level of human well-being: natural assets, financial assets, physical assets, human assets and social assets. Access to natural capital is generally considered as one of the parameters determining human well-being and more specifically the level of poverty. Ecosystem goods and services Biodiversity supports, provides and regulates ecosystem services to the benefit of people (MEA 2003). These services are important for human well-being. Ecosystem services change as a consequence of changing biodiversity. If specific species are harvested, the decreasing stock of these species may affect the provision of food, non-food and energy and this influences human well-being. The quality of regulating services is influenced in particular by species composition as compared to species richness of the ecosystem (MEA 2005b). Biodiversity loss, even small short term losses, may impact negatively on the capacity of the ecosystem to adapt to internal and external shocks (stability and resilience). Most ecosystems can loose species but still maintain their characteristic functions and stability (Gunderson et al., 1995). However, apparently redundant species may be particularly functional for resilience, to respond to unpredictable events or gradually increasing pressures (Hanna et al., 1996). It may only be a false impression that some species are redundant as long as such disturbances did not occur. Ecosystems goods and services are generally produced and delivered through the following processes:

• A potential ecosystem good or service is built up during a longer or shorter time.

• The goods and services of ecosystems are built with a diversity of species.

• Natural systems which have had a long time to develop have the highest possible biodiversity and the highest potential goods and service level.

• Using ecosystem goods and services causes a chain of reactions including changes of community (loss of biodiversity in the sense of mean species abundance), changes of flows and stocks of carbon and nutrients and possibly the retention capacity. Harvesting

one good affects all functional characteristics.


198

• The initial level of goods and services can generally recover after the use incident. However in some occasions a system is overexploited and passes a threshold, which changes the system fundamentally. During recovery, biodiversity usually increases towards ‘naturalness’.

• An exploitation investment is needed to extract the specific good or service.

• After harvesting the ecosystem regenerates by natural processes. Humans can make investments to replace artificially this process aiming at the compensation of the loss of services or prevention of the loss of other services. This can be done by restoring

investments (e.g. replanting forests, soil and water conservation measures, building irrigation channels, etc.) A minimal level of biodiversity is needed to absorb such investments.

Biodiversity and human well-being linkages Different notions exist on the relationship between poor people and natural capital in the surrounding ecosystems, and the linkages between poverty and biodiversity loss. Some of these are: � There are hungry people in the world because of limits upon their physical, economic and

social access to food (Cavendish 1999). Prevalence of hunger is very high among small-holder farmers, herders, traditional fishermen and forest dwellers. They rely on a poor or degraded natural resource base, have inadequate access to knowledge, technology, production inputs and markets.

� The poorest people in rural areas are most dependent on products obtained from their direct surroundings, either by cultivation or by gathering and hunting and fishing. Female headed households are often relatively poor and depend more on products from e.g. common property forests, because they do not always own cropland.

� Poor livelihoods particularly in drought-prone areas depend upon products and services directly obtained from ecosystems. Ecosystems provide a high diversity of food products that help overcome food shortages, serving like a safety net. This natural resource can be degraded, causing biodiversity loss, by over-exploitation (tragedy of the commons)

� Growth abnormalities and poor nutrition (stunting) are found most frequently in areas with high soil degradation. Cropland degradation has been identified as having strong linkages with hunger and ongoing biodiversity loss (Potting and Bakkes 2004).

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) stated that two third of ecosystem services required for the survival of poor people are strongly decreasing (MEA 2005a). Changes in biodiversity were more rapid in the past 50 years than at any time in human history MA (MEA 2005b). Ecosystem services link human well-being with the state and trends of biodiversity. The deterioration of ecosystems leading to the loss of biodiversity will also decrease the ability of providing goods and services by these ecosystems. People that are directly dependent on the goods and services provided by the ecosystems in their surroundings are most vulnerable for the deterioration of ecosystems (MEA, 2005b). It is frequently argued that biodiversity loss is a cause as well as a consequence of poverty (Adams et al. 2004). The downward spiral of poor people leads to further natural resource degradation and may deteriorate the poverty situation. Poor people also suffer from the decline of ecosystem services as a consequence of actions by other groups, when the winners exploit ecosystem services at the cost of access by other stakeholders. Trade-offs may occur to other people in the same area, in space (to people outside the areas) and in time (future generations).


199

There is no simple relationship between economic growth and hunger (MDG 1) with environmental degradation and biodiversity depletion (MDG 7). The debate is characterised by rather bold statements and generalisations. Many of these have shown –at least partly - to be conflicting with available evidence and are therefore by some characterised as “myths” (see also Lambin et al 2001), such as: 1. Export-oriented economic growth may affect biodiversity but improves employment and

poverty, and eventually leads to restoration of the environment at a certain level of economic development (Yandle et al 2004; Thirwall 2000; Weatherspoon et al. 2001).

2. Agricultural intensification programs, including land titling, reduced discount rates and access to credits, leads to more efficient use of land and natural resources and reduces biodiversity loss.

A reason why “myths” persist is the fact that poverty – environment- biodiversity dynamics are not simple 1:1 relations. They are complex systems governed by a range of underlying economic, social and ecological factors that also vary on different spatial scales and the level of economic development. The challenge is identify useful pattern within these a multi-domain, multi-actor and multi-scale processes. Goal and methodology This paper presents the development of a conceptual framework for interactive dialogues with IFSA Farming System partners, by which insight and understanding on biodiversity-poverty relationships will support more effective policies for biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation. The conceptual framework that will be proposed aims at quantification of linkages between biodiversity (loss) and poverty (alleviation) and the underlying mechanisms involved. The framework is based on a desk study of a selection of 9 case studies. The selection was made from more than 20 cases by omitting similar production systems from different countries (see in annex 1 the summary of 9 cases), the outcomes of an international workshop (Quito, November 2004) and literature review. The study has an exploratory character and aims to lead to model design. Based on insights in linkages between biodiversity loss, poverty and hunger, the aim of this study is to discern patterns and mechanisms that have wide applicability. In doing so we expect to realise the following ambitions and advantages: � Reducing complexity to a number of ‘typical mechanisms’ that describe biodiversity-

poverty dynamics; � Providing a framework for integrated analysis and design of proactive policies, in stead of

reacting upon undesirable change. The case studies were analysed for their state of biodiversity at first. Then we found, as other authors concluded as well (Lambin et al 2001; MEA 2005b), that land use change in combination with and use intensity (Alkemade et al in prep.; Reidsma in press) is the major factor causing biodiversity loss. Therefore, we determined classes of land use intensity in relation to biodiversity loss. Secondly, we analysed the case studies for their poverty level. We looked carefully to the characteristics of process: stable or not stable situations as well as different degradation pathways. Initially long lists and later on short lists of factor of unsustainable change were identified for each case study. In the line with the determination of two overall transitions for economic poverty by Task Force 1 (Millennium project 2004a) we developed a small number of constellations of major causes of poverty and biodiversity


200

loss. Finally we integrated the findings in a typology of unsustainable change as well as in one overall conceptual framework. Results Dynamics of biodiversity and human land-use intensity Pristine ecosystems, with high biodiversity, may show biodiversity decline as these are increasingly influenced by mankind. There were case studies with high biodiversity (case study 1), medium biodiversity (case study 4), regular (case study 5 and 8) and very low biodiversity (case studies 2, 3 and 7). The relationship between livelihoods, the forest or other natural ecosystems, and its biodiversity, evolves in time, in relation to changing land-use and socio-economic development. Thus, as we will see, the functions of biodiversity also change. This suggests that it is useful to place land use in a temporal (time) perspective, as the use of ecosystems changes in time. We found that selective logging (case study 1) can be followed up by forest colonisation (case study 4), and later intensive agricultural production (case 3). Land use can also placed in a spatial perspective, as different types of land-use may occur alongside each other as part of a moving frontier (Kessler, 2003). Case studies were ordered according to the intensity of production: low intensity land use (case study 1 and 9) in contrast to high intensive (case studies 2,3 and 7) and some stages in between. When the intensity of land use increases, natural ecosystems are influenced in order to release natural resources and make use of ecological processes to generate desirable products and services. This requires inputs of human capital. As this transition proceeds, dependence on ecological processes (natural capital) is generally replaced by man-made / management interventions (human capital) (Figure 1). While natural capital is free and in principle accessible to everyone (including poor communities), human capital is usually in the hands of a few (excluding poor communities). The transition into intensive production systems therefore increases in most cases vulnerability for poor communities in particular (case study 7).


201

Figure 1: The relation between biodiversity and human management inputs for different

transition phases of forests (adapted from Kessler, 2003)

An Indonesian forest conversion gradient demonstrates the transition in the use of forest resources from hunting, selective logging and gathering (case study 1), to shifting cultivation (case study 4) and extensive livestock keeping, to small scale agriculture, agroforestry and finally large scale agriculture (case study 2) and tree plantations (case study 3). Roughly, four phases can be distinguished, each of which may be characterized by a certain level of human well-being, land use intensity and biodiversity: � Phase 0: the pristine situation without measurable impact from human action in natural

ecosystems, which is called the historical baseline; � Phase 1: local livelihoods living in relative harmony with intact biodiversity, high access

to and dependency on forest products, interests to protect the forest against external threats;

� Phase 2: moderate access to and dependency of local livelihoods on fragmented forest biodiversity, agricultural land-use and non-agricultural incomes become more important;

� Phase 3: low access to and dependency of local livelihoods on degraded forest resources and their biodiversity, agricultural land-use and non-agricultural incomes are most important.

Figure 2 demonstrates how these different phases can be seen as occurring alongside each other, while also changing from phase 0 to phase 3 as a moving frontier. Note that sometimes these changes can occur very rapidly, and intermittent phases may be skipped altogether (e.g. forest clearing for soy plantations).


202

Stable or unstable biodiversity and poverty relations Each of the four land use phases may be stable or unstable. Stability implies that one can speak of equilibrium between people and natural resources, characterized by a certain level of biodiversity and vulnerability of the ecosystem, and a certain level of poverty and vulnerability of livelihoods, that persist over a long period of time without major change. It can be hypothesized that sustainability in broad terms (including social, economic and environmental dimensions) is greatest if some natural capital is being adequately exploited (for socio-economic development purposes) and regulatory services being replaced by human capital.However, each situation may also be unstable, implying an increased vulnerability for both biodiversity and local livelihoods, as a result of internal and/or external forces, leading to a gradual or sudden transition to another level of biodiversity and poverty. The concept of states and transitions is based on the theory of induced innovation or transitional change (Boserup, 1965; Hayami and Ruttan, 1985). Transitions from one situation to another can be considered as flip-overs as a result of intensification of land use accompanied by excessive ‘biodiversity leakage’ from the managed ecosystem (loss of natural capital). We will now describe three land-use states, in line with the concept of states and transitions, and based on empirical evidence (Kessler, 2003). Subdivisions could be made but are not considered helpful for the aim of this study. Land-use state 1. Harvesting: hunting, gathering and fishing = biodiversity based. This state (Case studies 1 and 9) is characterized by harvesting (extraction) of natural resources including the diversity of animals and plants. In this state livelihood systems make use of a high diversity of natural products (e.g. the mangroves: their ‘supermarket’). Thus, livelihoods are a function of the natural biodiversity and its regeneration capacities. Biodiversity is little influenced or only localized changes occur. Ecological regulation and reproduction processes are not affected. There might be a slight decline of biodiversity quality due to selective harvesting of preferred products. Population pressure is low and local communities are relatively poor as few products are being marketed. The livelihood system is relatively closed. Hunger may occur seasonally as a result of natural variation. Productivity is low, allowing only low population densities to survive. Harvesting systems are low intensity and low frequency, with low labour productivity and low technological inputs. There is no scarcity of products, except possibly for some highly preferred products. Typical livelihood systems are hunting and gathering, forest dwelling communities using non-timber forest products, forest-based plantations, small-scale shifting cultivation, nomadic grazing and low-impact fishing for instance in intact mangroves. As ecological processes are largely intact and pressures are low, natural calamities will in most cases be dampened and some reserves will remain. Land-use state 2. Extensive agricultural exploitation = ecological processes based. This state (Case studies 4 and 8) is characterized by increasing expansion into intact natural ecosystems and to acquire and convert land for production of desirable products, but livelihood systems still heavily depend on ecological processes as well as renewable energy sources to maintain a certain level of productivity and stability. Thus, livelihoods are a function of the quality of ecological processes and the delivery of supporting and regulating ecosystem services. Natural ecosystems are affected on a large-scale, particularly productive sites, but with low intensity so that ecological processes remain largely intact but biodiversity is much affected.


203

Population pressure has increased and poverty has reduced to some extent due to some marketing of products. Subsistence level predominates but the production system has become more open. Frontier mentalities predominate (moving agricultural frontiers). Scarcity of natural resources becomes imminent, and mainly includes depletion of natural resources. This may cause hunger in case of natural calamities such as drought or floods. Typical livelihood systems are shifting cultivation, dryland mixed agriculture, extensive grazing, low external inputs agriculture, intercropping, agroforestry, and agrosylvopastoral land-use in dryland areas. Forest products (timber and non-timber) and wetland/aquatic products typically form a safety net. Labour productivity is moderate. Land-use state 3. Intensive agricultural exploitation = external inputs based. This state (Case studies 2,3 and 7) is characterized by intense manipulation of ecosystems and involves a major conversion of ecosystems, ecological processes and biodiversity. Livelihood systems are not anymore directly dependent upon the quality of ecological processes, but have become a function of external inputs including agrochemicals and unrenewable energy sources. Production systems have become more dependent upon machinery, capital inputs and fossil fuel supplies, including management practices and agrochemicals to replace the role of ecological processes for protection, regeneration and reproduction. These inputs have further increased productivity of a limited number of products irrespective of the original ecological processes. Conversion of original ecosystems is now widespread and large-scale thereby greatly affecting natural as well as agro-biodiversity. Environmental quality is mainly affected by pollution in stead of depletion. Population pressure has further increased. Average poverty has further reduced due to more marketing of products, but inequality has substantially increased as certain groups benefit more than others. This is related to the fact that external inputs and energy sources depend upon capital inputs which are controlled by few. Pollution thresholds and the profitability of external inputs and markets determines the boundaries to this state. This state is characterized by a higher level of education, human institutions, environmental management regulations and social services. Nevertheless, livelihoods have become more vulnerable to human management calamities and prices changes. Typical livelihood systems are intensive cropping, livestock fattening, aquaculture, irrigated cropping, monocultures, and forest plantations with exotic species. Degradation pathways Above states and transitions can be considered as the ‘reference’ framework of gradual and sustainable change. These changes may include temporary moments of land degradation before a new equilibrium is found. However, we all know that high levels of degradation and poverty may occur. We like to distinguish three different types of degradation processes.

- Small scale exploitation of natural resources (state 1) is extended at a large scale by use of external human inputs.

- Depletion of resources through involution from state 2 if population pressure further increases while conditions for intensification are not met.

- Involution from state 3 if intensification of production is not controlled by human management regulations, or if production systems collapse by market failures and declining governmental support.

The relationship between environmental quality (- biodiversity) and economic development in the case studies could be seen as an environmental Kuznets curve (Yandle et al 2004), which portrays economic growth (GDP per capita) initially being linked to a decline of environmental quality (from case study 1 into 4 and further into 2 or 3), but at a later stage


204

showing an inverse relation whereby economic growth is associated with environmental restoration (pathway a + b in figure 3). There is empirical evidence for restoration of the quality of the environment such as air, water and soils as a function of GDP per capita for industrialised (OECD) countries. Pathway (a) illustrates how initial economic growth will affect biodiversity, as ecosystems are exploited and manipulated to generate a limited number of highly valued products, at the expense of other products and services. Situations of high biodiversity and extensive use by poverty are evolving into more intensive use and increased human well-being but lower biodiversity. According to the intensity of the land use system, the starting point of bifurcation (o) is situated more upwards (case study 1) or downwards (case study 7) in line (a). The transition of land-use states 1 to 3 may be plotted on pathway (a). Pathway (b) illustrates the environmental Kuznets pattern of environmental restoration as economic growth continues, such as witnessed by reduced air and water pollution in some industrialised countries. There are, however, indications that the relation between biodiversity and GDP per capita does not necessarily follow the pathways (a) and (b) for each land use or farming system (Figure 3). While pathway (b) may reflect restoration of biodiversity in agrolandscapes, for instance by sustainable farming practices with a multifunctional land use objective, pathway (c) probably better illustrates the with difficulty restoration of biodiversity in rich societies and probably also for case study 6 on reforestation. Restoration of wild biodiversity particularly requires a long period, and only takes place if, environmental qualities (such as air, water and soil quality) have been fully restored and if biodiversity loss is still reversible. Degradation of (agro)ecosystems involves conversion into a state with hardly any productive ecological processes and biodiversity remaining. Pathways (d and e) illustrate collapse of biodiversity values as a certain threshold is surpassed, for instance depletion of fish stocks or wildlife (such as in case studies 1 and 9), desertification or salinisation processes (in irrigated production systems such as case study 7). In pathway (d) this collapse does not lead to decline of GDP per capita (and as assumed no increase of poverty and hunger incidence), as there are other sources of income (e.g. oil exploitation, services, industrial growth). However, in pathway (e) collapse of biodiversity affects poverty and hunger incidence, causing emigration or marginalisation of the people involved. And we found another pathway based on case study 8 from the Ukrainian case study of the collapse of the Soviet Union production and marketing system after the independence in 1992. Pathway (f) depicts the restoration of biodiversity at the cost of human well-being, but does probably not follow the (a) line backwards.


205

Figure 3 The possible relationships between biodiversity and GDP per capita, indicating 6

different pathways.

Causes of unsustainable change In the previous sections we looked at the dynamics between livelihoods and poverty and natural ecosystems and its biodiversity. We will now look at the forces and responsible actors driving these processes of change. In an earlier paper, causes and underlying factors were studied and summarised from a range of literature on deforestation dynamics (Contreras-Hermosilla, 2000; Geist and Lambin, 2001; Kessler et al., 2001; Angelsen and Wunder, 2003; Wardle, 2003; AIDEnvironment 2004; MEA, 2003). Based on these studies, we identified the following issues and factors as being relevant to understand processes of unsustainable change: � Local livelihoods: their poverty status and vulnerability; � Natural ecosystems: their productivity, biodiversity status, fragility; � The dependency of livelihoods on ecosystem goods and services; � Socio-economic contextual factors; � Proximate / direct causes of unsustainable development, mainly at local level (e.g.

increased fish catch per unit effort, agricultural expansion); � Root causes, mainly at meso and macro scale; � Exogenous trigger events, both negative or positive. Using this information, we identified three mechanisms causing unsustainable change with negative impacts on both biodiversity and socio-economic conditions: 1. Poverty (livelihood)-driven change 2. Capital driven change 3. Policy driven change


206

Biodiversity-poverty mechanisms are interpreted as commonly occurring combinations of interlinked factors that together strongly affect biodiversity-poverty relations. It is assumed that the world-wide variety of biodiversity-poverty relations can be reduced and described by a limited number of typical mechanisms. Thinking in terms of mechanisms is not in contradiction with the fact that every situation has its unique features and there are no standard solutions. Mechanisms are like clusters with common features and therefore have in common certain policy consequences, both at micro- and at macro-level. These will need to be specified for every situation. Mechanisms are powerful constellations of factors at different levels (global, national, local) that together are the cause of strongly unsustainable change in terms of poverty and biodiversity (i.e. show leakage in both ways). The resulting situation is one of high/er vulnerability of poor people and high/er fragility of ecosystems. It appears that in many cases certain events trigger an unsustainable change process. Trigger events may be armed conflicts, civil war, economic crisis or collapse of certain prices, or a natural catastrophe, floods, droughts and other climatic shocks and stresses. Unexpected trigger events causing accelerated loss of biodiversity and poverty always operate through one of above three mechanisms. Following are more detailed descriptions of the three identified mechanisms. Mechanism 1: Poverty (Livelihood) driven In case studies 4 and 5 unsustainable change is primarily caused by poor communities and livelihoods that are highly dependent on local natural resources, who have no alternatives than to overexploit it. They are confronted with increasing scarcity of and pressure on natural resources. The aim is mainly subsistence level incomes, including generation of basic revenues, by local communities through exploitation of natural resources. This directly (e.g. through hunting) and indirectly (e.g. through habitat destruction) affects biodiversity. Exploitation is low intensity-high frequency, by human labour mainly and limited capital inputs. An unsustainable situation occurs by rapidly increasing population pressure of poor people, which is caused by underlying policies such as resettlement, expropriation of lands, restricted access to protected area, or through economic policies that cause reduced incomes of rural livelihoods (such as reduced prices of agricultural products, higher taxes, higher costs of agrochemical inputs). It may also be caused by a decline of the quality of the land, or people being displaced to marginal lands where productivity is low. There are no winners, only losers, since no or very few additional revenues are generated. Thus it is impossible for people to come out of poverty. In some cases there are no clear user rights but local communities have de facto ownership, leading to major access and benefit sharing problems (tragedy of the commons). Here we find small-scale land areas and split-up of land among large families or communities Underlying factors and policies stimulating poverty-driven change are: � Population increase, mainly by immigration due to displacement, resettlement or conflicts � Land scarcity due to reduced access to productive lands � Community land tenure system with user right conflicts � Absence of land-use plans � Lack of alternative employment � Fuel wood scarcity, mainly in nearby urban centres � Low levels of education and training of jobs outside the primary sector � High dependence on subsistence food production and prevalence of frontier mentalities


207

Mechanism 2: Capital driven In case studies 1,2 and 3 change is primarily driven by profitable global markets for commodities that can be easily and cheaply produced in developing countries with available natural resources. Production is large-scale and intensive, meaning that much use is made of machinery and external inputs. Development of these large-scale production systems is made possible by cheap credits being supplied by globally operating financial institutions and key players. The export commodity is collateral for cheap loans that are not available for native products of crops destined for the local market. The aim is to gain short-term economic profits from exploitation of natural resources and trade of primary products mainly. Exploitation is driven by capital-rich global actors. An unsustainable situation occurs by massive capital inputs and disruption of ecosystems and local livelihoods to be replaced for the rapidly expanding demands from global markets. Ecosystems with their natural resources and biodiversity are intensively manipulated to release ecological potentials for maximum output of tradable products. Resulting production systems are capital-intensive and labour-extensive, causing employment opportunities in most cases to decline. In most cases the land is appropriated by private sector players in a (partly or wholly) illegal manner. This is made possible by disregard of local informal property and user rights, the low level of organisation and empowerment of local communities, and the collusion of political and economic interests. Large-scale plantations and concentration of land is apparent. Indigenous peoples and rural workers are often displaced. Underlying factors and policies stimulating capital-driven change are: � Non-respect of local land titles, making large areas of land easily available � Private investors ‘grabbing land’, not respect labour conditions and disregard

environmental legislation � Global trade arrangements � Access to cheap capital market credit by international financial institutions, including

affiliates of Western banks � Monopolies in certain parts of the market chain, such as exports being dominated by few

traders and retailers monopolies. Mechanism 3: Policy driven In case studies 7 and 8 unsustainable change is primarily driven by policies at the sub-national, national or even international level; bad governance and or corruption. Policy driven change is in most cases supportive to poverty driven change (e.g. through resettlement policies) or capital driven change (e.g. through perverse subsidies or unequal land policies). Without these supportive policies there would not have such a rapidly occurring process of unsustainable change. The policy driven mechanism may also influence biodiversity – poverty linkages in a direct way. Two examples illustrate negative impacts by policy driven factors mainly. The creation of protected areas may have a large negative impact on socio economic wellbeing on forest dwellers and local communities in biodiversity-rich natural ecosystems if access to historically “owned” natural resources is restricted. Land titling is beneficial for agricultural population but may severely impact on migratory pastoral systems if the pasture area is restricted and open passage from one grazing area to the other is blocked. At the same time, the poorly managed state-owned protected areas may be poorly managed, with loss of biodiversity (e.g. through poaching) as a result. The initial management systems by local communities are in many cases better, as long as the system is not put under great pressure.


208

If countries suffer economic crisis and budgets for agricultural development are cut down as a national policy or driven by the international community, such as the structural adjustments programs, market oriented small farmers suffer most from freezing on subsidies agricultural inputs and credit lines as well as down-scaled capacity building for technological innovation and market chain development. This directly affects both biodiversity and people, as poor communities have no alternatives than to ‘mine’ the natural resources, and will do so particularly if institutions to support farmers are absent. Typology of biodiversity Poverty relations The combination of (three) land use states and (three) mechanisms of unsustainable change creates a useful typology provide further insight of typical situations of causes of biodiversity loss and poverty. This typology is expected to simplify and reduce complexity, and place different cases in a spatial and temporal perspective. Different cases and situations can be plotted in the matrix of 9 possible cells (Table 1). Table 1: Typology of unsustainable change processes based on land use states and

underlying mechanisms. The representative case studies (see Annex 1) are placed in

brackets.

Mechanisms

Land-use states M1. Poverty driven M2. Capital driven M3. Policy driven

L1. Low exploitation – harvesting in coastal artesanal fishing and small holder rain-fed humid, forest based farming systems

Population growth and in-migration (9)

Foreign investors causing deforestation for timber, soy production, palm oil plantations or shrimp farming. (1,2,3)

Protected areas excluding local communities from traditional resource use (-)

L2. Extensive exploitation in: rain-fed, highland and dry-cold small holder farming systems

Soil quality degradation, reduced land area, population pressure (4,5)

Displacement of local farmers to less productive area by large-scale monocultures (2,3)

Land titling disrupting migratory pastoral systems (-)

L3. Intensive exploitation in wetland rice and dualistic farming systems

Inadequate use of agro-chemicals and farm size below economic feasibility (7)

Mechanisation and increase of scale; excluding small farmers from international markets (-)

Structural adjustment programs or market collapse affecting feasibility of production system (7,8)

It seems that capital driven change most commonly occurs and is most feasible where the economic potential of the location is high. This is linked to high ecological potentials and good markets. In most such cases, poor people are pushed out if their level of organisation is low and government is weak. Poverty driven change is stimulated by a low level of human development (e.g. low level of education), and a high level of dependency of local people on functional biodiversity, and is driven mainly by a rapid increase of population density (due to immigration, transmigration and/or reproduction). Policy driven change occurs most commonly where governments are weak or corrupt, and law enforcement is poor, and is often concurrent with the above two mechanisms. Case study (6) on reforestation programs could not be situated in the matrix of land use states and mechanisms of unsustainable change, being a policy measure designed for sustainable development. However, if the planned improvement of the socioeconomic condition of the people will not be attained by lack of access to natural resources, this case should be grouped


209

into the type: land use state A combined with the policy driven mechanism (creation of protected areas).

Note that these three mechanisms can occur alongside each other in one particular area. An example from Ethiopia shows the coexistence in one area of: � Capital driven deforestation (Mechanism 1) in natural forest or extensive agriculture

lands (Land use state 1 and 2) by private sector for tea and coffee plantations (few local people benefit, migrant labourers are brought in, tea and coffee are exported);

� Poverty driven expansion (Mechanism 2) of extensive small-scale agriculture (Land use state 2) (poor people remain poor and just survive, slopes are exploited indiscriminately, yields are low)

� Policy driven deforestation (Mechanism 3) by the state attributing pristine forest (Land use state 1) for establishing timber plantations (land is taken from poor people, land is forested, plantations are left idle, no one benefits).

The integration of findings in a conceptual framework It is our aim here to present a model design, as based on the insights and findings described in the previous section showing the relations between biodiversity, ecosystems and poverty, but also allowing quantification of the ‘boxes and the arrows’ in follow-up research. The central component in the frameworkl would be the land use state. The intensity of land use indicates the access to natural resources - biodiversity and level of production investments as well as the level of dependency on biodiversity for providing, supporting and regulation ecosystem services as defined in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA 2003). Alongside production investments such as labour, fertiliser inputs, etc., we consider ecosystem restoration investments such as irrigation channels, soil conservation measures and tree planting in order to support or improve ecological processes that support production. The human capital investments on the one hand and contributions from biodiversity on the other results in ecosystem services and impact on human well-being. Ecosystem goods and services are food, water, fish, timber, soil quality, C-sequestration and ecotourism, but also supporting and regulating services like nutrient cycling, water retention, soil formation, prevention of erosion, pollination, pest and disease reduction. Human wellbeing can be defined as food security, basic materials for wellbeing (income), and health as well as social relations and freedom of choice (MEA 2003). Examples of indicators for human well-being are: the food intake and calculate distance to hunger; health indicators; the number of people that can live from harvest; the income from selling products to the market; the surplus of labour or capital that can be invested into the production system and the dependency of people on the local production. Linked to this cycle is the degradation feed-back loop derived from our analysis of stable and unstable situations as well as mechanisms of unsustainable change; especially capital driven and policy driven that articulate the land use state - production cycle with the markets and policy measures at larger scales (see figure 4). The degradation feed-back loop has a land-use component and a socio-political component. The latter refers to the underlying causes at different levels. The combination and complementarity of these factors leads to the mechanisms as identified in chapter 2 above. We suggest a first list of factors that should be quantified in this context: population density and growth; income and income distribution; corruption index and trigger events such as social conflict and natural disasters; access to technology, capital, markets, and to natural resources; naturalness and brittleness of


210

ecosystems; nutrition cycle and erosion; food, water and energy supply as well as hunger and health risks.

Figure 4: A preliminary conceptual framework of ecosystem, biodiversity and poverty

relations, for quantification of ‘boxes and arrows’.

In-depth case studies on the integration of components and linkages between biodiversity, potential goods and services, use systems, effect on human wellbeing, mechanisms of unsustainable change, negative impact on ecological processes and remaining goods and services may answer the following key questions:

- What is the effect of biodiversity loss on human wellbeing/poverty? - What is the effect of poverty reduction strategies on biodiversity conservation? - What are underlying mechanisms of unsustainable change, that produce biodiversity

loss and severe hunger and income poverty at the same time? - What is the effect of soil degradation on human well-being? - Where are hot spot areas with biodiversity loss and increased poverty? - What are win-win solutions that have positive effect on poverty alleviation and

biodiversity maintenance?

Conclusions and Recommendations

Old myths on the relation between poverty and environment have been replaced by new myths. We found that to understand the diversity of poverty-biodiversity relations, these should be placed in a spatial and temporal perspective. The relation between biodiversity, poverty and hunger depends first of all upon the land-use state of a certain locality. States vary in terms of the equilibrium between ecosystem quality and people’s well-being, in terms of land productivity, and the dependency of people on ecosystem goods and services. Normally, transitions between states will occur and people’s ingenuity and adaptive


211

capacities will avoid a dramatic decline of biodiversity or people’s well-being. In these situations the green Kuznets curve, describing how ecosystem quality will be improved at high levels of economic income, may be valid to some extent. However, currently we find several situations world-wide where biodiversity loss and the increasing incidence of poverty and hunger are strongly linked. Based upon many case studies of which 9 are summarized in the annex 1 and a recent conference on biodiversity poverty relations, we have developed a typology for understanding and describing biodiversity-poverty relations, aimed at identification of solution policies. The typology consists of 3 land-use states and 3 underlying mechanisms, and can be briefly described as follows: � The level of poverty and biodiversity (stocks) and the way these are changing (flows) can

be classified into three land-use states, characterized by local socio-cultural context and dependency on natural resources.

� The transitions between these states can be sustainable or unsustainable. � Situations of unsustainable change are characterized by undesirable changes of both

biodiversity (natural capital) and poverty (human and social capital), and are in most cases characterised by rapid changes. Unsustainable change is characterised by the absence of positive trade-off between loss of natural capital and build up of human capital.

� Situations of unsustainable change may be related with capital driven, poverty driven or policy driven mechanisms. Where these mechanisms interact the pace of change is without precedence and rapidly leads to high rates of biodiversity loss, poverty and hunger.

In order to better understand biodiversity-poverty relations worldwide, and in order to help design solution policies and effective monitoring systems, we need more field-based evidence. Case studies will start out from the typology as proposed and will then be developed and quantified in line with a conceptual framework that was proposed in this article. The objective of such a framework is not only to show the relations between biodiversity, ecosystems and poverty, but also allow quantification of the ‘boxes and the arrows’. Acknowledgement We would like to thank our colleagues Ben ten Brink and Rob Alkemade at the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (MNP) as well as John Dixon at CIMMYT, Mexico for their inspiring analysis during research and useful comments on the draft.

References

Adams, W.M., Aveling, R., Brockington, D., Dickson, B., Elliott, J., Hutton, J., Roe, D., Vira, B., Wolmer, W., 2004. Biodiversity conservation and eradication of poverty. Science 306: 1146-1149.

Alkemade, J. R. M., Bakkenes, M., Bobbink, R., Miles, L., Nellemann, C., Simons, H., and Tekelenburg, A. Global biodiversity assessment framework (GLOBIO3). in prep.

AIDEnvironment (2004) Towards a Quality Management System for the program on natural livelihood resources and poverty alleviation. AIDEnvironment, Amsterdam

Angelsen A. and S. Wunder (2003) Exploring the forestry-poverty link: key concepts, issues and research implications. CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 40


212

Bailie, J.E.L., C. Hilton-Taylor and SN. Stuart (eds) 2004. 2004 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. A Global Species Assessment. IUCN, Gland, Switserland and Cambridge, UK.

Boserup E. (1965). The conditions of agricultural growth: the economics of agrarian change under population pressure. Aldine Publishing Co, New York.

Cavendish, W. 1999. Empirical Regulations in the Poverty-Environment Relationship of African Rural Households. Centre for the study of African Economies. Working paper Series 99-21. London.

Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN) 2005. Global Distribution of Child Malnutrition. Columbia University, Palisades, New York, USA.

Contreras-Hermosilla A. (2000). The underlying causes of forest decline. CIFOR Occasional paper no. 30. CIFOR, Indonesia.

Dixon, J., A. Gulliver and D. Gibbon 2001. Farming Systems and Poverty: Improving Farmers’ Livelihoods in a Changing World. FAO and World Bank, Rome and Washington D.C.

Geist H.J. and E.F. Lambin (2003) What drives tropical deforestation? A meta analysis of proximate and underlying causes of deforestation based on subnational case study evidence. LUCC Report series No. 4

Gunderson L.H., Holling C.S. and Light S.S. (Eds.) (1995). Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. Columbia University Press, New York, Chichester. 593 pp.

Hanna S., Folke C. and Maler K.-G. (1996)/ Rights to nature. Ecological, economic, cultural and political principles of institutions for the environment. Island Press, Washington, 323 pp.

Hayami Y. and V. Ruttan (1985). Agricultural development: an international perspective. Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press.

Humprey, M. 2003. Millennium Project Task Force 1 Background note. Kessler J.J. (2003). Working towards SEAN-ERA. A framework for integrating

environmental sustainability into planning. Tropical Resource Management Papers 43, Wageningen University and Research.

Kessler J.J, E. Wakker, W. Richert and J.M. Dros (2001). RETRAC. Resource Trade Cycle Analysis. Application to Tropical Forest Conversion. AIDEnvironment, Amsterdam.

Lambin E.F. et al 2001. The causes of land use and lad cover change: moving beyond the myths. Global Environmental Change 11 (261-269), Elsevier Science.

Loh J. 2002. Living Planet Report. World Wide Fund for Nature, Gland, Switserland. Millennium Ecosystems Assessment 2003. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A

framework for Assessment. World resources Institute, Wahington DC. Millennium Ecosystems Assessment 2005a. Living beyond our means. Natural Assets and

Human Well-being. Statement of the Board. World Resources Institute, Washington DC.

Millennium Ecosystems Assessment 2005b. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington DC.

MillenniumProject 2004a. Interim report of Task Force 1 on Poverty and Economic development. M. Pangestu and J. Sachs (eds.) Millennium Porject, UN secretary general and UN Development Group, Washington D.C

MillenniumProject 2004b. Interim report of Task Force 2 on Hunger. P. Sanchez and M.S. Swaminathan (eds.) Millennium Project, UN secretary general and UN Development Group, Washington D.C

MNP 2005. Outstanding Environmental Issues for Human Development. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.


213

Potting, J. and J. Bakkes (eds) 2004. The GOE 3 Scenarios 2003-2032. Quantification and Analysis of Environmental Impacts, RIVM-CESR-ICIS-SEI-NIES-UNEP, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

Reidsma, R., T. Tekelenburg, M van den Berg and R. Alkemade in press. Impacts of land-use change on biodiversity: an assessment of agricultural biodiversity in the European Union.

Sanchez, P. 2002. Soil fertility and Hunger in Africa. Science 295:2019-2020. SOFI 2003. FAO. The state of food insecurity in the world 2003. Food and Agriculture

Organisation of the United Nations. Rome. Ten Brink 2000. Biodiversity indicators for the OECD Environmental Outlook and Strategy,

feasibility study. Global Dynamics and Sustainable development Programme, RIVM report 402001014, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

Ten Brink et al. 2000. Technical Report on Biodiversity in Europe: an integrated economic and environmental assessment. RIVM report 481505019, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

Thirlwall A.P. 2000. Trade, Trade Liberalization and Economic Growth: Theory and Evidence. Economic Research Paper 63. The African Development Bank,Côte d’Ivoire.

UNEP (1994). Convention on biological diversity. UNEP, Switserland. UNEP, 2002. Global Environment Outlook 3: past, present and future perspectives, New

York. Wardle P. (2003) World Forests, society and environment- executive summary. United

Nations University, Tokyo. Weatherspon D., J. Cacho and R. Christy 2001. Linking Globalization, Economic Growth

and Poverty: Impacts of Agribusiness Strategies on Sub-Saharan Africa. Asia and the Pacific Forum on Poverty: Reforming Policies and Institutions for Poverty Reduction. Manila February 5-9th , Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines.

World Health Organisation 2003. WHO Global Database on Child Growth and Malnutrition. Geneva, Switserland.

Yandle, B., M. Bhattanai and M. Vijayanghavan 2004. Environmental Kuznets curves: a review of Findings, Methods and Policy Implications. Research study 02-1 Property and Environment Research Centre (PERC), Montana.


214

Annex1 : Characterization of some case studies for biodiversity – human well-being linkages Name

Countries Populatio

n density Farming system

Land use intensity

Market inte-

gration

Biodiversity

(ecosystem quality)

Poverty level

Combined trend

(see in fig. 3)

Main underlying

causes

Best practices

1. Selective logging in high value forests

Cambodia Low population pressure

Extraction natural resources

Low High 70-100% severe a ; capital driven

International trade, corruption and open access

Sustainable forest management with timber companies

2. Soy production

Brazil and Argentina

Low to medium population pressure

Large scale agro-industrial monocropping

High High 10% Medium

A and e: capital driven

Export oriented, agricultural frontier mentality, poor law enforcement

Integrated land use planning and valuation of forest for other ecosystem services

3. Palm oil development

Malaysia, Indonesia,

Low population density

Large scale agro-industrial monocropping

High High 10-20% Medium to high

a : capital driven

Export oriented, open access

Multi actor and multi land use planning

4. Forest colonization

Asia Increasing to high

Subsistence, Rain fed and low technology

Medium to low

Low 20-50% High A and e: Poverty driven

Population pressure, migration, food insecurity

Controlled migration, land use intensification, employment programs

5. Agriculture in dry tropics

Ethiopia, Sahel

Increasing to high

Subsistence, Rain fed and low technology

Medium to low

Medium

20-30% High E: poverty driven

Population pressure, resource degradation and land scarcity

Food security, employment programs and land use planning

6. Reforestation Programs

China, Vietnam and Nepal

High Reforestation, watershed protection and agriculture

Medium to low

Medium

20-40% medium B or C: Restoration driven

Need for watershed protection, international agreements

Collaborative forest management and leasehold agreements

7. High external input and irrigated agriculture

Asia, Latin America

High to very high

Market oriented smallholders

High High 5-10% Medium to low

E Policy driven

Land scarcity, Market dependence, Resource degradation Structural adjustment programs

Product diversification, exit to agriculture, smallholder export programs

8. Economic collapse

Ukraine Medium Land reform cooperative companies to smallholders

High to low

High to low

20-30% Medium to high

F: policy driven

Market failure, lack governmental support, technology clash

Smallholder support, diversification of production, adapted technology development

9. Coastal and wetland fishery

Philippines, Kenya

High Subsistence fishery

Low to medium

Low to medium

80-100% High E; Poverty or capital driven

Over fishing, competition from industrial off shore fishery

Management regulation


215

Subsistence and Organisational Strategies of Smallholder Farmers and Rural Workers in the Sub-Andean Drylands of Cuyo (Argentina)

Pablo Tittonell, Lorena Mozas, Natalia Manini, Ileana Paladino, Federico Vazquez Matías

García

Wageningen University The Netherlands, University of Lomas de Zamora Argenitinia, University of La Plata, Asociacion para el Desarolo Integral Agerntinia

Abstract The Cuyo region, which includes the wine production area of the Mendoza valley, hosts one of the largest areas of irrigated agriculture in the southern hemisphere (ca. 500,000 ha). Horticultural production (including fruits and vineyards) relies largely on human labour, having marked peak-periods during the year (planting, harvesting, pruning). In the past, these labour demands attracted migratory workers as well as employing a large part of the indigenous population on a temporary basis. Such seasonality, coupled with increased mechanisation of farming practices led to a generalised situation of under-employment and food insecurity among the poor, a large proportion of which became subsistence farmers. This study examines promising local strategies to overcome the main factor constraints faced by the new subsistence farmers in one village in the north of the region. Emphasis is placed on analysing self-definition and the reliability of the sources of off-farm income and how these affect farming (and marketing) strategies and natural resource management. The on-going activities and strategies of the grass-root organisation Caxi - Asociación para el Desarrollo Integral are introduced and discussed in relation to farm technological and marketing alternatives and to legal support for access to resources.

Introduction Farmers’ innovation is often indicated as the engine of development for rural livelihoods, particularly in smallholder farming systems (e.g. Altieri, 1999). Two types of innovation processes are of interest when analysing the reaction of rural communities to the tightening constraints to development (and subsistence): technological innovation, frequently operating at individual farm scale, and organisational innovation, which involves the local community and may pursue different objectives (market, legal, educational, sanitary, political, etc.). Both innovation processes may have synergies, since the development of a solid organisational matrix may favour the capture and horizontal dissemination of new technological, local knowledge, and opportunities; i.e. farmer-to-farmer information flows that favour social learning within the community (DFID, 2004). Successful examples of subsistence strategies supported by community organisation – such as the case presented here – may be of singular interest in the search for development pathways of a more extended applicability. The region of Cuyo comprises the drylands that extend until about 300 km east from the slopes of the Andes, roughly in between 32° and 36° S, within the Argentinean territory. The region includes the wine production area of the Mendoza valley, one of the largest areas of irrigated agriculture in the southern hemisphere (ca. 500,000 ha). The original inhabitants were the Huarpes people, who developed agricultural settlements alongside the region’s scarce rivers and wetlands. During colonial times, some of such wetlands (Lagunas de Guanacache) were intensively used to provide grains, grasslands, fish, fuel wood and timber, and handicrafts to the emerging towns in the region. Thanks to the later development of irrigation systems the region


216

became an important pole for horticultural production (including fruits and vineyards) that relied largely on human labour, having marked peak-periods of labour demand during the year (planting, harvesting, pruning). In the past, these labour demands attracted migratory workers as well as employing a large part of the indigenous population on a temporary basis. Such seasonality, coupled with increased mechanisation of farming practices led to a generalised situation of under-employment and food insecurity among the poor. As a result, subsistence farming has become an alternative means of covering household needs for food and to some extent cash. However, access to land and irrigation water poses a serious constraint to agricultural production and enhances the pressure on the (available) natural resource base. Our objective was to analyse and characterise the subsistence and organisational strategies developed by the local communities to overcome the main factor constraints faced by them in one village in the north of the region. Such strategies imply technological as well as organisational innovation. Emphasis was placed on analysing self-definition and the reliability of the sources of off-farm income and how these affect farming (and marketing) strategies and natural resource management. We will also introduce and discuss the activities, objectives and strategies of the local non-governmental and community-based organisations (NGO’s and CBO’s), which aim to develop farm technological and marketing alternatives and to provide legal support to the community in their struggle to access production resources. Materials and Methods Field research was conducted in the village of ‘La Estación’, in the locality of Jocolí (N of Mendoza Province). Annual rainfall in the area is below 200 mm, and the current vegetation is dominated by xerophytes, shrubs and herbs, and scattered woodlands of hard wood trees (e.g. Prosopis spp., Aspidosperma quebracho-blanco, Geoffroea decorticans) that have been markedly impoverished in abundance and composition. There are coexisting farm systems in the entire region, which reveals a clear pattern of inequity: the smallholder, subsistence farms (51% of the total number of farms) occupy 2% of the land area, whereas the largest commercial farms (0.3% of the total number of farms) own 54% of the total land area. Locally, two different agroecosystems can be identified: the area under irrigation and the rangelands (including woodlands). Background information on the region (governmental surveys, soil maps, climatic data) was collected by visiting relevant institutions (e.g. Provincial Department of Irrigation, National Agricultural Research Institute, Extension Office, Municipality, University of Cuyo, Development NGO’s, etc.), where interviews with key informants were also conducted. A number of field data collection techniques were used to gather detailed data concerning the community context as well as the families. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were chosen because of the type of research questions posed. Focus groups, village transect walks and direct observation were the major tools of the qualitative research format. Group discussion was intended to include dialogue between community members that would illuminate multiple dimensions of the topic and represent their experiences from their viewpoints. The transect walks were aimed at recognising and mapping the various elements of the natural resource base, including water sources, grasslands and woodlands, and the topo-sequence of soil types. They


217

proved also useful for recognition of signs of degradation in the landscape and as a first step in the stratification of households on the basis of their resource endowment. Individual interviews were carried out to collect both quail- and quantitative data in relation to household income, investments and productivity of their various enterprises. Emphasis was placed on analysing historical trends in relation to families’ story lines and self-definition of the household head (cf. Mettrix, 1993). Existing socio-economic information from previous surveys was used and complemented with new key questions during the individual interviews aiming at categorising livelihood strategies. The ‘daily clock’ and labour calendars were used to analyse the allocation of the time of the different family members to different household activities, including on-, off- and non-farm activities. Flows of resources (cash, agricultural inputs, nutrients, water and labour) were quantified through interviews and resource flow mapping. Currently 19 families live in the area of La Estación, of which 15 were interviewed and participated in the plenary activities described above. Results and Discussion Social structure, communal resource base and problem analysis The village of La Estación has developed since the beginning of the 20th century from the initial settlements established around a rural train station, which used to be a frequent stop for water and firewood supply for trains covering the long distances between the major towns. The train line has been inactive for more than 15 years now. Governmental surveys conducted at district level (Lavalle, Mendoza Province) revealed alarming figures for several development indicators of the rural communities in the drylands, aggravated by the economic crisis faced by the country since the late nineties. For example, up to 10% of illiteracy in the population older than 10 years; only 2.2% had access to high education (university studies/professional schools); 37% of the families inhabited inadequate houses (poor sanitation, flooring and water supply) and 16% lived in semi-permanent, precarious houses (DEIE, 1999). Our survey at village level revealed an average family size of 4.2, with 67% of households having 4 or more members; 60% of the population were direct or indirect descendents of the local Huarpes, of which 47% inherited their land from their parents; the average age of the household heads was 39 years, and most of them were men (83%); 73% of the families lived in permanent (brick) houses. Three main story lines were identified in La Estación, which are representative of other communities in the region. In many cases, the descendent of the original Huarpes inhabiting the drylands became livestock keepers; since in many cases they worked in the past as herders for big cattle ranches, living in posts scattered in the rangelands next to natural water sources (puestos) they are still known as puesteros. During the late 19th and 20th centuries, migrants from other regions in the country, from neighbouring countries and from Europe arrived in the region attracted by the flourishing horticultural production pole of Mendoza. A large part of these families of rural workers (obreros rurales) were forced to become subsistence and/or semi-commercial, small scale farmers (chacareros), due to the referred impacts of seasonality and mechanisation of farming activities. The self-definition of the household heads as either puestero, chacarero or obrero was used to stratify livelihood strategies in La Estación (Table 1). The difference between chacareros and obreros were not always clear in terms of the reliability on external sources of income; a fundamental difference was that the chacareros reinvested their


218

income (irrespective of its source) in agricultural activities. Households headed by women fell in the category of chacareros. Table 1: Typology of rural livelihood strategies based on the self-definition of their household

heads Self-defined

group Main source of

income % in the

community* Area of land holdings (ha)

Average income (arg$ year-1)**

% of on-farm income

Puesteros Livestock (cattle, goats)

13 (20) 0.1 +/-0.1 4610 +/-3120 75***

Chacareros Food and cash crops, goats

60 (50) 2.5 +/-1.8 6740 +/-3440 54

Obreros Off-farm rural employment

27 (30) 0.9 +/-0.4 9160 +/-6330 33

*The figure in brackets indicates the estimations for the entire dryland region, derived from group discussions with the community **2.89 arg$ = 1 us$ (2004) ***Although the livestock grazes in communal rangelands, this activity was considered as ‘on-farm’.

Land tenure in both the irrigated and the rangeland systems is characterised by occupation; some families amongst the chacareros (53%) had a written statement certifying their presence in their land for the period occupied (normally including two generations), which do not imply land ownership in legal terms. The lack of legal rights on the land prevents the community from legal access to irrigation water, although main irrigation channels run right across the village. Drinking water is supplied by the local municipality in 200 L tanks, and also bought locally from private sources. Access to irrigation water is sometimes facilitated by negotiating with local authorities and/or commercial, large scale farmers: members of the local community keep the irrigation channels clean of weeds and land slides and in exchange they can use water to irrigate their crops. Such informal agreements are more common during the off-growing season, so some of the farmers specialised in vegetable production (chacareros) dig water ponds for storage. Farmers specialised in livestock ranging (puesteros) dig mud dams in the bottom of micro basins to collect rain water for the animals. Transect walks and community maps revealed three main land use units: a strip of farm land alongside the irrigation channels, scattered woodlands used as sources of fuel and timber, and a vast area of arid rangeland used by the community. During plenary discussion groups, the main problems affecting rural livelihoods in both the irrigated and the rangeland systems were identified, discussed and ranked according to their relative importance for the community (Table 2). Legal access to land and water was unanimously indicated as the main problem faced by the community in the irrigated system. Biophysical degradation of the communal resource base was locally perceived as the main problem affecting the rangeland system and thereby constraining development.


219

Table 2: Ranking of main constraints to development of rural livelihoods performed during

plenary group discussions with the community Ranking Irrigated area Rangelands/woodlands

1° Access to resources (land, water) Deforestation, overgrazing, erosion

2° Marketing of agricultural production Loss of wetlands and valuable natural grasses

3° Resource degradation (soil salinity) Land tenure

4° Dependence on external inputs Water availability and quality

Subsistence Strategies A quail-/quantitative analysis of the farm systems, including production activities and flows of resources (labour, cash, biomass/nutrients), was performed in the households self-defined as chacareros (60% in the village). A common pattern was identified across households (Figure 1), characterised by a tightening dependence on external resources and inputs for food production and income generation. Most external inputs purchased by the household (feedstuffs, seeds, agrochemicals) were directed towards the vegetable and chicken production subsystems. The chacareros did not own cattle but goats, and had typically one horse used for traction and transport. Horse, goat and chicken manures were either used in the vegetable and fodder plots (average areas of 0.7 and 0.2 ha) or sold to large commercial farmers in the area. The main vegetable crops were garlic, onions, sweet corn, potatoes, squashes, pumpkins and melons, and a range of leaf vegetables for self-consumption. Lucerne (alfalfa) was the main fodder crop used to complement the diet of the goats, for the horse, and for sale as hay to cattle owners. Temperate fruits such as prunes or apples are grown to produce jams and comfitures that are sold during farmers’ fairs in town, and small areas of vineyards (0.05 ha) are kept to produce a local wine (vino patero) for self consumption and the local market. Figure 1: A rural livelihood model of a representative smallholder, subsistence farm in Jocolí,

Mendoza, Argentina.

The dependence on external resources from the surroundings was obviously larger in the case of the systems managed by the puesteros. However, selling goats for consumption in town during festivities (e.g. around Christmas) represented an important source of income also for the

home

goats

fodder

garden chicken

horse

Fruits &

vineyard

rangeland

manure

pit

woodland

inputs

Off-farm

earningsmarket market

marketmarket

water


220

chacareros, and more than 85% of the animal diet depended on resources from the communal rangelands. All households had some kind of off-farm earning, which varies widely between summer and winter months (on average, 78% of the total annual monetary off-farm income is generated between October and March). The chacareros spent on average 45% of their labour force in off-farm activities and the obreros 80%. However, a fundamental difference between these two groups was seen in the reinvestment of part of their income in agriculture; 28% of the expenditures in the former group were directed towards farm inputs. Organisational Strategies Three different CBO’s are active in the region and represented in La Estación: the union of landless rural workers (UST), the rural youth organisation (UJOCC) and the organisation of the Huarpes people (Table 3). A local NGO known as CAXI – Asociación para el desarrollo

integral coordinates the efforts of the organised local community. The institutional mission of CAXI is based on four pillars: (i) institutional building of the organised rural communities, (ii) promoting educational processes that embrace cultural diversity, (iii) awareness raising and social conscience on human (and indigenous) rights, and (iv) facilitation/ promotion of economical production alternatives by the community. The CBO’s and CAXI operate synergistically and made decisions together, during frequent plenary sessions and based on consensus. Table 3: Community base organisations (CBO’s) active in the region

Organisation Description Common problems Pillars/objectives

Unión de trabajadores rurales sin tierra (UST)

Organisation of landless people from 4 districts in N Cuyo

Access to land and water for self-subsistence farming

Participation and collective work

Unión de jóvenes campesinos de Cuyo (UJOCC)

Youth organisations from 9 rural communities in N Cuyo

Lack of opportunities for human development, employment, education

Revalorisation of local culture and alternatives to youth emigration

Pueblo Huarpe Organisation of the local Huarpes people

Land tenure regulation and recognition of indigenous rights

Territory rights: land, water and natural resources


221

CAXI acts simply as facilitator and provides legal and logistic support to the organised rural community. The efforts of these 4 organisations are combined to target 4 different priority areas, covering education, legal, production and marketing goals (Figure 2). Figure 2: A scheme illustrating the target areas of the community base organisations active in

the northern communities of Cuyo, Argentina. Caxi is the Huarpes term for the expression “to

search for”.

Key achievements by these organisations are summarised in Table 4. Pilot efforts of micro-financing, contract farming and communal production, brand development and extension of grades and standards to gain access to regional and urban markets have been implemented by the organised community with the support of CAXI. A commercial brand has been registered by the organisations to commercialise their products in farmers’ fairs and shops specialised in regional, traditional products and handicrafts. Table 4: Key achievements by the organised rural community supported by CAXI

Institutional/legal Production/marketing

• Judicial processes on land and water

• Capacity building, training & education

• Institutional development and networking

• Database on land use and typologies on subsistence strategies

• Small-scale winery and food processing industry

• A collective farm for experimentation and production

• Mechanisation for collective use

• Micro-credit system

A target area which success is difficult to quantify is the farmer-to-farmer dissemination of knowledge. Innovative farmers have been identified within these communities, but the extent to which their experiences contribute to social learning, flowing between the members of the organisations, is poorly known. Further steps envisaged by the organisations include a greater emphasis on research/training activities to promote agroecological, sustainable production as alternative to the current farming systems that rely purely on the natural resource base.

Training & awareness,

cultural

promotion

Research & innovation

Communal (collective)

production &

marketing

Legal support for access to

land and

water

CAXI + organised rural community


222

Discussion and Concluding Remarks A very significant threat for the sustainability of these strategies is the decline in off-farm ecological services that buffer the farming system. Common resources decline significantly, reducing flows of fuel, grazing resources, organic resources for soil fertility, and even water into the farming system. For example, nutrients brought in the farm by the goats when they are corralled for the night (manure) are used in the vegetable gardens, from which a large part ends up in the market (cf. Fig. 1). Only a very few farmers buy mineral fertilisers, occasionally, and use them at insufficient rates. Although the local community (particularly the chacareros) was able to develop intensive subsistence and/or semi-commercial systems that allowed them to sustain a living and generate income under extremely constrained conditions, it is time for a change. To avoid the unsuccessful stories of other agroecosystems in South America, that pushed local peoples towards the cities upon their collapse (e.g. Bucher and Huszar, 1999), it is necessary to redesign the system pursuing sustainability. Amongst the various attributes of sustainable agroecosystems (productivity, stability, equity, adaptability, self-confidence - López-Ridaura et al., 2001) social capital plays a central role. Social networks facilitate innovation, the development of knowledge and sharing of that knowledge (DFID, 2004). However, previous experiences (e.g. Defoer et al., 2000) showed that it takes a while for community members to get used to the farmer-to-farmer learning process and become confident in the approach. Social capital can also be valued as a good in itself, and it can make an important contribution to people’s sense of well-being (through identity, honour and belonging). Membership organisations can help increasing local information flows and innovation, exert influence on higher-level structures and perform other functions that constitute different dimensions of empowerment. However, capacity-building support is frequently required to ensure that membership organisations remain representative of all their members – including the poorest – and that they develop financial and internal management systems that facilitate effective operation and interaction with other organisations. Organisational innovation appears as a promising first step in the redesign of the current systems towards more sustainable rural livelihood systems. However, the question remains on who has to assume the transaction costs of the organisation? Presently, a small proportion of the urban community of Mendoza city buys labelled products from the communal production fields and processing units at La Estación. The funds are partly used to sustain the organisation and its functioning (for collective production assets and inputs, micro-credits, representation costs, etc.). Undoubtedly, such a situation is not likely to be sustainable if organisational strategies such as this one start to mushroom up throughout the drylands; this clearly calls for action and support from the local governments, which are the currently absent. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Prof. Dr. Ken Giller from Plant Production Systems, Wageningen University (The Netherlands), for his collaboration in revising this manuscript, and Mrs. Simone de Hek (FAO) for her contribution during the methodological design of the fieldwork.


223

References Altieri, M. 1999. Applying agroecology to enhance productivity of peasant farming systems in

Latin America. Environment, Development and Sustainability 1: 197 - 217. Bucher E.H., Huszar, P.C., 1999. Sustainable management of the Gran Chaco of South America:

Ecological promise and economic constraints. Journal of Environmental Management 57, 99-108.

Defoer T., Gacheru, E., Rotich, D., Wabwile, E. and Baltissen, G. (eds.), 2000. Proceedings of an end of project workshop on Participatory Learning and Action Research for Integrated Soil Fertility Management. KARI/MoARD/KIT/ICRAF. Kisumu, Kenya.

DEIE, 1999. Dirección de Estadísticas e Investigaciones Económicas. Sistema de Información Monitoreo y Evaluación de Políticas y Programas Sociales. Publicado en: Indice de Desarrollo Humano - Comparación Departamental, Mendoza, Argentina.

DFID, 2004. Department for International Development Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. [email protected].

López-Ridaura S., Masera O., Astier M., 2001. The MESMIS framework. LEISA 16, 28-30. Mettrick, H. (1993) Development oriented research in agriculture: an ICRA textbook. The

International Centre for development oriented research in Agriculture (ICRA), Wageningen, The Netherlands. 290 pp.


224

Agriculture and Rural Development Project in Cambodia with Scope for Human Security

- Nurturing Self-reliant Rural Communities -

Kunihiro Tokida

Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Cambodia

Abstract Human security is a key issue when implementing agriculture and rural development projects in developing countries. The Kingdom of Cambodia has entered the development stage from the reconstruction stage after one decade from the first free general election held in 1993. In the last decade physical and social infrastructures have been improved and the security of the country has been improved. However, we still observe many difficulties in the implementation of development projects in rural areas. Some enjoy development while an increasing number remain in poverty. Sometimes if not all the time, we have found in the rural area that the gap between the wealthy and the poor has increased. Some negative impacts on the reconstruction and development processes were created during the recovery period. Most donors did not pay much attention to the negative impacts of rural development projects because pro-poor projects were believed to bring only positive results. Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) has an agricultural project in Battambang that is in the north-west of the country 300km from Phnom Penh. The project, named Battambang Agricultural Productivity Enhancement Project (BAPEP) started in April 2003 with a 3-year cooperation term, and this is the first project that JICA has implemented with a provincial government in Cambodia. Four Japanese experts are assigned to work with PDA to provide better technical services to farmers. This project focuses not only on agricultural production but also on the rural community. The Activities in BAPEP show practical use of the human security concept. The fundamental principle is to avoid the negative influences of the development project implementation. The experience of BAPEP shows that technical support based on the resources and potentials in the area is critical for agriculture and rural development after the reconstruction stage. The ‘farmer to farmer’ approach is effective for easier adaptation of improved techniques with technical support. Assurance of market is vital for stable production and quality improvement. It is useful to involve existing local authorities for supporting and strengthening farmer organization. Small farmer groups can coordinate in different activities by interacting with each other and synergy can be expected. By combining these different activities, the rural society can support different levels of farming and this leads to human security in rural areas. It has also been observed that a network among government agencies, donors, Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and farmer organizations is useful when the local government has little power to take initiative in rural development.

Introduction Battambang province is located in a plain and is characterized as a rice granary. In the 1960’s Japan and Cambodia had an agricultural development project named ‘Japan Cambodia Friendship Agricultural Technology Center’ in order to boost rice yield in the country. It was focusing on high yielding technology with high inputs. The project was terminated due to the escalation of the civil war. After 40 years, Cambodia proposed to have an agricultural cooperation project in the area. The average rice yield in Cambodia remaines as low as 1.9 t/ha which is far lower than neighboring countries. Japan and Cambodia agreed on the


225

implementation of the project in the service area of Komping Puoy Irrigation System (KPIS) i.e. 2850ha of rehabilitated area with a dam of 80 million m3 after stabilization of the nation through the peace process. The purpose of the project is that participating farmer’s agricultural productivity in Komping Puoy area is enhanced, and their livelihood becomes stable with their active participation. During the last two decades, many multi-national, bi-lateral and NGOs practiced massive development activities as in emergency recovery. Many people enjoy improved physical and social infrastructures, while many rural people remain in poverty. As mentioned we are observing a growing disparity among rural people. It seems that the reconstruction and development process has created negative impacts, while only limited people are benefiting from the current development. To avoid repeating this, we need to pay more attention to the people and society rather than production or technology. The government of Cambodia has perceived rapid poverty reduction as an integral part of its mission to achieve national reconciliation and cultural renewal, and a prerequisite for maintaining political and social stability. A stable macroeconomic environment is important, but this does not guarantee improvements in livelihoods in the countryside where the vast majority of Cambodia’s poor live. It cannot be achieved unless increasing numbers of Cambodians living in rural areas have better access to basic services, for example. The advance of globalization in recent years has intensified the interactions among people in the global community. Cambodian people in rural areas are not exempt from this movement. Human rights crises have also been increasing due to transnational threats and national threats. To deal with these issues, conventional state-level approaches and the traditional framework of national security are insufficient. It is necessary to consider the perspective of human security in order to address direct threats to individuals. JICA announced the New JICA reform plan, which introduces the perspective of human security, a field-oriented approach, and rapid actions with effectiveness. JICA has been strengthening the capacity of country offices to practice cooperation programs and projects best suited for the needs of people. Human security is a basic concept in humanitarian support activities, yet it is a new concept in technical cooperation. It is, however, an important concept that will lead the future direction of all JICA programs, while practical application of the concept of human security in development cooperation requires careful and flexible actions depending on the situations in which people find themselves. BAPEP is one of the frontline projects in implementing the human security concept in a real Cambodian situation. Reality of Rural Life A number of project formulation study missions for BAPEP were dispatched by JICA prior to project implementation. During the studies, a workshop was conducted with farmers to analyze the problems they face in the area. A Rapid Rural Appraisal was also conducted to grasp the needs of the area. It was, however, not sufficient to come up with detailed plans of project activities, because the studies did not involve government officers on a fulltime basis. Therefore, BAPEP conducted a baseline survey with government staff who work as counterparts of


226

Japanese experts to identify more specific issues to be addressed by BAPEP at the beginning of its implementation. Before conducting the survey, key informant interviews were conducted to know people’s perception among the villagers. The questionnaire format was prepared with the Provincial Department of Agriculture (PDA) staff after a series of discussions based on the results of key informant interviews. Samples of 319 households were randomly selected from 2564 families in 7 villages and 284 households responded to the interview. The survey was a good opportunity among persons related to BAPEP to have a common understanding on the situation of villagers as well as to obtain skills on surveying methods. The survey results showed the vulnerability of villagers. Eighty five out of 284 households faced food insecurity through the year in 2002 and 172 households lacked food in November, even in the province that is famous as a rice granary. Some households are over 80% of the Engel’s coefficient. The average household expenditure was USD 878 and the expenditure for food shared 39% of the total expenditure. Children experienced 74 cases of Dengue fever and 58 cases of Typhoid, and these illnesses require a significant amount of expenditure for treatment. The average expenditure for medical treatment was USD 122 while the median of household expenditure was USD 455. This leads to money lending from NGOs, friends or neighbors, and sometimes from local creditors with high interest rates. Villagers must earn from non-agriculture activities to support their living and the median reached USD 250. If people face difficulties, they are forced to sell their land. The survey identified problems related to agriculture with the characteristics of each village in the target area. Some villages did not have many farmers with paddy fields in the irrigated area. Many landless farmers work as farm labor and they get food from the mountains and sometimes from streams. Paddy fields within the irrigation system are advantageous for stable food production, and the farmers have better access to services. BAPEP has tried to avoid unnecessary conflicts by providing services to groups of people that alleviate the gap among villagers. In fact, the target area of BAPEP was planned in the Komping Puoy Irrigation System, but BAPEP included the whole village areas as the target area where some lands are outside of the irrigation system. Approaches Considering sustainability after BAPEP, it would be ideal to have activities that can be continued among farmers who are final beneficiaries. BAPEP has adopted the following approaches during our project implementation. Farmers’ participation BAPEP has tried to include activities not only related to agricultural technology but also social support to vulnerable villagers through agricultural sector activities. In this connection, active farmer’s participation is vital and BAPEP promotes forming various small farmer groups suited to different actions such as quality seed user group, vegetable producer group, pig raiser group, chicken raiser group, food processing group, etc. Also the existing water user association called the ‘Farmer Water User Community’ (FWUC) is supported by the project. Strengthening of


227

FWUC is necessary for improved water management that makes high productivity possible. We are aiming to increase the synergy of these group activities to improve not only individual farms but also rural areas as a whole. The ‘farmer to farmer’ approach is more realistically sustainable. This includes exchange visits by farmers and model farmers as change agents. Support from local government BAPEP has encouraged ‘farmer to farmer’ approach, while the capacity of the PDA staff has been built to perform research and extension activities. Of course, PDA has a mandate of providing technical services to farmers. However, the situation of the local governments including Battambang is not promising because decentralization is very slow and personnel management is done by the central offices. In addition, the annual budget is mainly for salaries and utilities such as electricity, water and fuel. Little funding is for technical services, and most is made by foreign assistance. It is very important to have a stronger linkage between the provincial office and the central office to provide better programs for farmers. Linkage of stakeholders From the aspect of effective and efficient assistance implementation, BAPEP has also encouraged coordination among stakeholders related to agriculture and rural development. These organizations include government agencies, bi-lateral donors, NGOs, the private sector, and farmers. The established network is called Battambang Agriculture and Rural Network (BARN). The function of BARN is to exchange and to share information for consistent and harmonized activities in the agricultural and rural sectors The chairman is the governor of Battambang province and the director of PDA leads the BARN meetings. “Ownership” is the key of sustainability, and all stakeholders are encouraged to participate in the development process. Activities BAPEP has four major activities, namely (0) Capacity building of government personnel and strengthening the network of related organizations, (1) Rice production technology improvement, (2) Diversification and farm management improvement, and (3) Strengthening farmer organizations. The activities from (1) to (3) directly work with the target farmers aiming synergy among different group activities. Capacity building of local government To enhance the function of PDA, especially research and extension, BAPEP developed Komping Puoy Agricultural Development Center (KADC) in the target area and rehabilitated some facilities of experiment stations belonging to PDA. BAPEP also introduced a partial accounting system in the center and stations for more sustainable operation and management. Building the capacity of personnel in the department is one of the most important inputs and activities to nurture future leaders in the province. Four persons attended different types of trainings in Japan, and all of them came back with individual action plans for agriculture and rural development in Battambang. Beside trainings in Japan, BAPEP provided opportunities for them to observe situations in the neighboring countries such as Thailand and Philippines by exchanging experiences among concerned development entities. As a result of these exchange visits, PDA has an agreement with a university in Srin province in Thailand for the further exchange of


228

activities. The recommendations and action plans that came up from the technical exchange visit are shared in the concerned ministries. Though BARN, many NGOs acting in the agricultural and rural sectors have had better access to new information and they work closer with the local government departments. A seminar on “Producing Profitable Rice” and the event of “International Year of Rice 2004 in Battambang” are some of the achievements by participating farmers, the private sector, NGOs, international organizations and the government. Two technical committees on farmer organization and rice quality improvement have been organized to respond to the specific demand of the BARN members. Rice production aiming markets Farmers have produced rice for centuries and the practice is considered sustainable. It is, however, necessary to adjust rice production to meet the recent demands under WTO. The quality of produced rice in Cambodia is not so high due to the use of seeds with mixed varieties. The quality improvement of rice is one of the most important issues to add value. It is necessary to show farmers how new or improved methods of rice production are technically feasible and profitable. KADC has conducted experiments such as plant density, planting period, fertilizer application and so on. Farmers can select the most suitable rice variety for production by evaluating the rice growing in the demonstration field of KADC. More than 20 varieties with technical data based on the results in KADC were provided which were compared with the rice production data of some farmers in the target area for more accurate judgments. In addition, farmers examined the taste of cooked rice of several popular varieties in the area. After the farmers’ decision, KADC produced registered rice seeds for seed growers and initial graded seeds for quality seed users. BAPEP also invites rice millers to provide market information to the farmers during the field day. Quality seed users’ groups were formed to establish a micro-system of seed production and distribution among neighboring farmers. The group visited a rice miller to know the importance of rice quality improvement and they examined how rice quality is determined by using some test procedures. Then they could make a contract with a rice miller to sell produced rice at a higher price than the ordinary market price. BAPEP conducted farmers field school (FFS) on rice production for the group members during a whole cropping season. In wet season 2004, the average yield of the group members reached 4.2t/ha while it was only 2.8t/ha in 2003. The major reasons for achieving this result were use of high quality seed, efficient irrigation, and better crop management. The members sold their products to the rice miller and to neighboring farmers at a satisfactory price. Agricultural diversification and farm management The target area of BAPEP is a major rice production area and other agricultural activities are not so active. The government promotes diversification of crops for stable food production for each household, but it is not easy to start with products that are not grown in the area. Based on the results of the baseline survey and market study in the area and in Battambang, BAPEP selected some products with farmers suited for each village. To disseminate good practice through model farmers, BAPEP selected some potential farmers as cooperators. By observing and exchanging information with leading farmers with good practices, farmers in the target area can learn a lot.


229

The participating farmer cooperators can be model farmers and instructors for training of neighboring farmers through FFS. BAPEP has emphasized the importance of farm business management as well as cultivation techniques. The cooperators analyze their farming with BAPEP by making a cropping calendar and an annual farming plan. The cooperators come up with a vision of their farming and rural life in the future after analyzing their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT). During the planning, factors are considered such as resource utilization, marketability, farm gate price, production cost, and risks, for optimal farming. BAPEP has also encouraged farmers to make and use natural pesticide and compost in order to improve safety and to reduce cost. After one year of monitoring, cooperators examine the results of their own plan with farm records. We observed many immediate changes of cropping due to unpredictable changes such as water availability, disease of crops, illness of farmers, and so on. One of the most popular crops in the area is peanut. When BAPEP started initial investigations of peanut production with farmers, very low yield was observed due to poor quality seed, high plant density and diseases. After conducting demonstrations of peanut production in the experiment station, some peanut farmers agreed to have on-farm research using improved cultivation methods with BAPEP. The on-farm research activities are shared with neighboring farmers to observe the differences from the conventional method. The yield was satisfactory and peanut growers from different villages visited on-farm research cooperators during harvest-time. For promoting pig and chicken production in some villages, BAPEP conducted training of trainers (TOT) to Village Livestock Agents (VLA) as a refresh training by collaborating with a local NGO that is a member of BARN. Some agents fabricated a henhouse and a piggery, and started to process concentrated feed, and they demonstrated healthy raising of livestock to neighboring farmers. Some agents have conducted group training on pig raising in their respective villages. It is also noted that pigs and chickens can be raised by women who usually stay in their farmhouse in these villages. Strengthening Farmer Organization Farmer Water User Association

There was an organized but not well functioning Farmer Water User Association (FWUC) when BAPEP started its activites. BAPEP examined the appropriateness of irrigation facilities with FWUC and identified some substantial problems. During the tertiary canal construction using Food for Work (FFW) of the World Food Program (WFP), BAPEP shared the cost of concrete pipes with FWUC. To improve water management of the irrigation system, the provincial department of water resources and meteorology (PDOWRAM), BAPEP and FWUC members agreed to have model sites for water management by having check structures in the main canal to intake water easily to the lateral canals. It started with surveying for paddy map making and member listing of the areas, and then delivery canal construction design was started. Irrigation water was scheduled, delivered and monitored by the FWUC officers to ensure irrigated production. The members achieved easy delivery of water with canals. The villagers felt the actual benefits of irrigation when the whole of Cambodia were suffering from draught in 2004, and the willingness of the members to pay the irrigation service fee (ISF) has improved.


230

In addition, technical support from PDOWRAM is vital to have technical backstopping when FWUC come up with a proposal of facility improvements and improved water management. Water delivery schedule and rotation of irrigation area should be the responsibility of PDOWRAM while operation and monitoring are roles of FWUC in Komping Puoy. Another weak point was that the FWUC in Komping Puoy did not have a clear understanding of the roles of officials and sub-group officials, and this prevented FWUC disseminating the correct information through appropriate channels. BAPEP arranged field visits where water user associations are well organized, and exchanged the ideas for future strengthening of FWUC. BAPEP also facilitated the dissemination of the bylaws of FWUC through sub-group officials. By disclosing the process of the association, villagers could realize the importance of its presence. More important thing is the clear accounting of the budget and collected ISF. The association can also get strong support from local authorities by involving commune officers and village chiefs and it has proved very useful in managing conflicts among members of the association. Food processing groups of rural women

After a demonstration of food processing i.e. papaya pickles in the village, many women participants showed interest in starting food processing activities. BAPEP encouraged rural women to form a group to have an opportunity to start food processing in some pilot villages. Food demonstration was organized in each village and BAPEP collected needs and background information during the meeting, and identified potential leaders and methods of food processing. It was necessary for participants to improve processing skills to get tangible benefits and to show the achievements to family members. BAPEP also conducted TOT to the group of leaders from each group for improvement of skills and increase of menu. Some groups are interested in selling their products in the village and training on packaging and hygiene was conducted. Many groups have regular meetings to make sweets using locally available materials for home consumption and sponge cakes for selling. During their meeting some groups collect a participation fee to buy some materials to be processed, and they deem that the meeting is useful and beneficial for them. This proves that the activities by regular members are sustainable, although each group is not so big. Some groups are interested in starting mutual funds or cooperatives. A food processing contest was organized inviting local authorities. The groups had presentations of their processing methods and sold their products on the spot. The activities of women groups are well recognized in the villages and they are more confident in their initiatives. Lessons Learned from BAPEP Targeting on vulnerable people

It may be correct to focus on the most vulnerable people to reduce disparity, but it may not be true in reality that more assistance goes to more vulnerable people. Donors are aiming at positive influences and changes in a certain term if not immediately. This sometimes misses the most vulnerable people to be the target of projects. Agricultural technology is not exceptional, and it is much easier for rich farmers to apply improved technology because it requires resources like other economic activities. On the other hand, it is not efficient to instruct farmers directly from government personnel as we used to do because of the limited number of extension workers and the limited funds for extension activities in most developing countries. In order to reach the most


231

vulnerable farmers with these restricted conditions, it may require ‘farmer to farmer’ approach by forming groups of neighboring farmers giving them more opportunities to learn from neighbors, rather than attending short training sessions. It would be difficult to disseminate techniques unless they show a tangible benefit for farmers even we work with a small group of farmers. Retain justice to avoid conflicts People who have access to the authorities are in a better position to receive services from the government. If we cannot provide the same information to all at the same time, it may create negative situations. Farmers who have paid the full amount of ISF, may not be willing to pay ISF in the future if they know some FWUC members did not pay without specific reasons. People absent from the meeting are usually not so positive about the activities. It is necessary to have a mechanism to support group activities to avoid creating conflicts. As a precondition, it is important to have a complete facility of irrigation system to have a better water management to avoid unnecessary troubles. For organizations that handle money, it is vital to have a transparent accounting system and a clear decision making system as well as an information delivery system. It was proved that a newly established organization like FWUC needs strong support from local authorities to manage conflicts until the organization is self-reliant. Participation of end users and support from the local governments The experience of BAPEP shows that technical support based on the resources and potentials in the area is critical for the agriculture and rural development. ‘Farmer to farmer’ approach is effective for easier adaptation of improved techniques with technical support from local government. Assurance of market is vital for stable production and quality improvement, and leads to the generation of the economy from agriculture. If farmers are not ready to receive technology or to invest in agriculture, empowerment of groups of farmers is a necessary step. Small farmer groups can coordinate in different activities by interacting with each other and synergy can be expected. By combining different activities, the rural society can support different levels of farming and it leads to human security in rural areas. It is also observed that a network among government agencies, donors NGOs and farmer organizations is useful when the local government has little power to take initiative in rural development. Implications for Practice How can we have a smooth transformation from reconstruction to development stage?

It might be true that no development happens without public order and security. On the other hand, emergency relief provides many materials for immediate needs of people without having an exit strategy because life is the first priority and no delay is allowed. The actions during the reconstruction stage sometimes produces a negative influence on the actions during the development stage due to lack of ownership by the people. There is a need to have a smooth mechanism to proceed from the reconstruction to the development stage. This may mean having an exit strategy when we start any assistance. It is more important, however, not to assume that development assistance always brings only positive impacts.


232

Can we solve rural poverty through agriculture?

The main activities in rural areas are closely related to agriculture, but problems of farmers are very complex. It may not be possible to solve all problems from the view point of agriculture. Then one may say that a holistic approach can solve all problems of farmers. However, many countries have less decentralization, and this makes it difficult to implement integrated rural development projects. It is necessary to respond to people’s needs through flexible and inter-sectoral approaches and to have stronger linkages among government agencies to implement a holistic approach. The important thing is to have more inter-disciplinary people rather than multi-disciplinary organizations or networks. Unless individuals have the idea of sharing information and to have common understanding, each organization remains independent. Can we save the poorest of the poor?

Focusing on the most vulnerable people is necessary and we need to empower people as well as protect them if they are too weak to receive assistance. This is one of the perspectives on human security. A driving force is necessary to develop the rural community, and it would be the agricultural sector because the sector is one of the most important economic activities in rural areas. A safety net should be provided if people are not benefiting from agricultural activities and their survival, livelihood and dignity are at risk. The safety net may be provided by the government, the donors, the community, or the people. We should pay more attention to adverse effects of development so that we can provide the most appropriate safety net to the people at risk. References Institute for International Cooperation, Japan International Cooperation Agency (2002), The

Kingdom of Cambodia, -From Reconstruction to Sustainable Development-, JICA Country Study for Japan’s ODA, Tokyo.

Kingdom of Cambodia (2005), Annual Conference on Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (07-09 April 2005), Phnom Penh.

Kingdom of Cambodia (2002), National Poverty Reduction Strategy 2003-2005, Phnom Penh. Murshid, K. A. S. (1998), Food Security in an Asian Transitional Economy: The Cambodian

Experience, Working Paper 6, Cambodia Development Resource Institute, Phnom Penh.

O’Leary, M. and Meas (2001), Learning for Transformation, a study of the relationship between culture, values, experinceand development practice in Cambodia, Battambang, Krom Akphiwat Phum, Battambang.

PDAFF and JICA (2003), Rural Livilihood in Komping Puoy Area, - A Baseline Survey -, Battambang Agricultural Productivity Enhancement Project, Battambang. http: //www.jica.go.jp/english/about/policy/reform/human/index.html http: //www.jica.org.kh/bapep/index.html

papers theme 4 development strategies, pathways and synergies

Documents